Have a nice independence then Scotland

British spies may have orchestrated the abusive messages sent to JK Rowling after she spoke out against independence, a leading SNP politician has claimed.

Christina McKelvie said the torrent of online attacks aimed at the Harry Potter author could have been the work of “secret service plants”.

I’m sure you’ll enjoy being run by complete loons like this.

15 comments on “Have a nice independence then Scotland

  1. That comment is so dumb that Christina McKelvie must be a MI-5 plant designed to undermine the SNP.

    But it is a tough choice. Christina McKelvie or Diana Abbott? Christina McKelvie or Ken Livingstone? I am a firm critic of the SNP (although independence is another matter), but I don’t think their loons are any better or worse than our loons. I just think loons on the National level have better PR, discipline and a friendly media that does not report this sort of thing if you’re on the left.

    Remember Tam Dayell. Who came up with endless conspiracy theories about the General Belgrano. Who still thinks the Lockerbie bombing was some vast American plot. Who said Blair got involved in the Iraq War because he was controlled by the Jews.

    Although maybe it is something in the water so if the Scots go, the quality of English political life will improve.

  2. Christine Graham is the moron who either didn’t know the difference between King George VI and St George, with regard to the George Cross, or simply ignored it for the sake of a propagandist rant. She’s a prime example of the normally very well hidden anti-English bigotry that fuels much of the SNP voting block.

  3. I’m sure Will Hutton has planted an agent to comment on this blog.

    Who do we all reckon it is?

  4. SE

    Are you telling me the SNP has anti- English bigots in its ranks? My world is falling apart.

  5. Surreptitious Evil – “Christine Graham is the moron who either didn’t know the difference between King George VI and St George, with regard to the George Cross, or simply ignored it for the sake of a propagandist rant.”

    Grahame is a first class idiot, but in all fairness, do you think that 20% of the British people know the difference between King George VI and St George with regard to the George Cross? Or had even heard of the George Cross? Or St George come to that. Or George VI.

    “She’s a prime example of the normally very well hidden anti-English bigotry that fuels much of the SNP voting block.”

    True but her bigotry goes deeper than that:

    On 24 November 2009, Christine Grahame lodged the following motion at the Scottish Parliament: “that the Parliament supports the establishment of an international inquiry into the circumstances that led to the blowing up of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie in December 1988 that murdered 270 passengers and urges all relevant Scottish authorities to co-operate with it; further supports that such an inquiry should also consider the relationship of that atrocity to the shooting down of Iranian flight 655 over the Straits of Hormuz five months before by a US warship, which claimed the lives of 290 passengers, and urges the international community to pursue, investigate and bring to justice all those ultimately responsible for these two terrorist attacks, which it considers constitute crimes against humanity.”

    If Scottish independence means we get rid of c*nts like this, I am all for it.

  6. but in all fairness, do you think that 20% of the British people know the difference between King George VI and St George with regard to the George Cross? Or had even heard of the George Cross? Or St George come to that. Or George VI.

    20%? Yes, yes, yes and yes. Of course, for the first one, it is slightly more obvious to those you despise because of the existence of the Victoria Cross and the obscurity of the various Ss Victoria.

    With regard to Iran Air 655, an appalling mistake on behalf of the Vincennes, but flying a civil airliner over a war zone (at least one with modern AA weaponry) is silly. Flying it over a war zone in which you are one of the major participants is crazy. But that’s what happens when you let the AGIR run significant portions of civil society. All sorts of crazy.

    Which leads to an amusing* contrast on a Friday morning, when I am desperately trying to avoid writing two depressing reports. AGIR versus SNP? Mad religious bigots versus mad nationalist bigots? AGIR are clearly better armed, but fuel up a few neds with enough Buckie, let them have their beloved machetes back, and I bet they could give the Basij a run for their money.

    * Yes, I am probably crazy.

  7. At least she isn’t blaming Mossad or the Jews, which puts her a cut above the standard Lib Dem or Lefty loon.

  8. Surreptitious Evil – “20%? Yes, yes, yes and yes.”

    You must live in a different part of the UK to me. Went to a very different school.

    “With regard to Iran Air 655, an appalling mistake on behalf of the Vincennes”

    And this is where her nuttiness lies. Of course it was a terrible mistake. Perhaps a little negligent. Perhaps a little lax on the bridge. But not, as she pre-judges, a terrorist act nor a crime against humanity. Nor remotely comparable. All of those are smears amounting to a Blood Libel on her part. It is to Scotland’s shame that she still has a career.

    “but flying a civil airliner over a war zone (at least one with modern AA weaponry) is silly. Flying it over a war zone in which you are one of the major participants is crazy.”

    Except the Iranians didn’t. It was a very bad incident, in part because the plane was not remotely near Iraq. The US was not a participant in the war. The plane was in Iranian waters, on route to Dubai. And it did not look anything like an F-15 descending for an attack.

    “But that’s what happens when you let the AGIR run significant portions of civil society. All sorts of crazy.”

    The crazy in this incident was not on the part of the Iranians. A boring, routine flight. Over safe waters. The Americans might have been a little gungho, perhaps even a little trigger happy. All the fault lies on their side. But a terrorist crime against humanity it ain’t.

    “AGIR are clearly better armed, but fuel up a few neds with enough Buckie, let them have their beloved machetes back, and I bet they could give the Basij a run for their money.”

    Neds don’t commit suicide bombings. Nor is the SNP suggesting that they rape 12 year olds before executing them to make sure they can’t go to Heaven. Whatever else you can say, the SNP is not like the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Respect on the other hand ….

  9. @SMS
    Ever watched The Bedford Incident? I’ve always wondered if the Bridge on the Vincennes was the same as the one portrayed in that film.

    How different things might have been if the US had simply held their hands up, admitted it was a ghastly mistake, fully compensated the families of the victims and promised to change bridge operations to make it less likely to occur again.

  10. Steve Crook – “How different things might have been if the US had simply held their hands up, admitted it was a ghastly mistake, fully compensated the families of the victims and promised to change bridge operations to make it less likely to occur again.”

    They did eventually admit fault and pay out. The captain did not command another ship. Which is not unusual anyway because the US Navy, like the Royal Navy, has far too many officers for far too few real commands. Not as bad as Britain which now has more admirals than ships. But getting there.

  11. Steve Crook,

    The Vincennes incident still gets taught to RN Air Warfare Officers as a “what not to do” case study. There was a video camera running on the bridge, and audio recordings in the Command Information Centre (US-speak for the Operations Room). It wasn’t “Bedford Incident”, it was far worse than that.

    Leaving aside the over-aggressive reactions by the Vincennes to get into the situation (short version, she went looking for a fight, didn’t find one, started one instead, and if the Iranians had planned the incident they’d have sunk her easily) there were a series of errors on her air warfare side:-

    – The Air Picture Compiler interrogated the wrong target to get Identification Friend or Foe data. Vincennes assigned Track 4474 (the Iranian Airbus) a Mode 2 IFF code, associated with a F-14 Tomcat that may have been ground-running at Bandar Abbas or just a stale library entry. IA655 was in fact squawking the correct Mode III, code 6760, up to the moment she was destroyed, confirmed by other US and British ships in the region (HMS Boxer, USS Sides, USS Elmer Montgomery)

    – Vincennes read a series of warnings, mostly on miitary frequencies. The only two warnings given on the civilian GUARD frequency were directed at “Iranian military aircraft” and “Iranian aircraft descending towards my position”; not exactly attention-getters for a civilian airliner in a steady climb.

    – The sailor reporting Track 4474’s position confused his displays and started calling out the figure for range – which was decreasing – as altitude, giving the impression that 4474 was diving towards the Vincennes while in fact it was in a steady climb throughout. (He also got more and more agitated, to the point of actually shouting and screaming)

    – The ICAO air lane from Bandar Abbas to Dubai had been plotted incorrectly in Vincennes’ combat system, so while the aircraft was on her declared flight path and obeying all rules, it appeared to the Vincennes that in fact 4474 was veering out of the flight lane towards her (and by then Vincennes was inside Iranian territorial waters and right under the flight path)

    – Captain Rogers declared his intent to take 4474 at twenty miles’ range; in fact, it took his crew a recorded twenty-two attempts to load and allocate a launcher, assign a SPG-62 illuminator and get two birds away, intercepting at eleven miles.

    The Iranians did nothing wrong except operate a scheduled commercial flight within weapons range of a US warship. Vincennes, a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, was meant to be able to handle a multi-axis air raid on a carrier battle group, with dozens or scores of missiles inbound from bombers and submarines, surrounded by friendly ships and aircraft she wasn’t meant to kill, and the abject failure of the ship when confronted with a single airliner was a serious embarrassment to the US Navy. (The hardware worked perfectly, and in fact the AEGIS system had correctly identified Track 4474 as non-threat; it had to be overridden to allow engagement. The problem was the crew and the training standards…) Hence part of the determination to deny any error or mistake by the US…

  12. Jason Lynch

    Thanks. Some of this I knew, most I didn’t. It really does make me wonder about the state of mind of officers and crew aboard the ship though. They were obviously expecting an attack and were sufficiently hyper to make a series of elementary mistakes and not have anyone spot them.

    My reference to Bedford wasn’t to do with the actions, more the state of mind of the crew. Tightly wound and acting as if they were at war not peace. Which is where the Bedford was.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.