Sir Chris Hoy

This forum provides an opportunity for people to debate and discuss the latest current events; to talk about what's going on in the world today and discuss what's behind the news headlines.

Sir Chris Hoy

Postby Govangirl » Wed May 29, 2013 10:23 pm

So, our Olympic hero, who has always expressed his pride in being Scottish, Sir Chris Hoy, is not allowed to say what he thinks? Are nationalists now out to silence anyone they disagree with? Is this the kind of Scotland we are to expect with independence? :?:
Blow away the dreams that tear you apart
Blow away the dreams that break your heart
Blow away the lies that leave you nothing but lost and brokenhearted
User avatar
Govangirl
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:02 pm
Location: Sassenachland


Re: Sir Chris Hoy

Postby gizmo » Wed May 29, 2013 10:48 pm

As I understand it, the Anti Chris comments amounted to a couple of internet and/or twitter crackpots.
Mountains and molehills spring to mind.
gizmo
Can't Stay Away
Can't Stay Away
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 5:33 pm
Location: roonaboot


Re: Sir Chris Hoy

Postby Govangirl » Wed May 29, 2013 11:12 pm

Blow away the dreams that tear you apart
Blow away the dreams that break your heart
Blow away the lies that leave you nothing but lost and brokenhearted
User avatar
Govangirl
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:02 pm
Location: Sassenachland


Re: Sir Chris Hoy

Postby Mary G » Wed May 29, 2013 11:39 pm

I think the Telegraph is covering the story too, top story in its Scottish edition.

The cybernat thing can be very ugly. You're right Govangirl to sound warnings about how wrong it is to treat so disgustingly anyone who simply expresses an opinion that differs from your own. I find the mood of some of the debate quite depressing.

The irony is, that the sincerely held views of decent SNP and independence-minded folks are not being heard, because this background noise of vicious attacks, playing the man, not the ball, is drowning out any chance of a healthy debate. I'd have expected much more condemnation from Salmond et al. Ultimately it's their cause being damaged by this unseemly behaviour.
Mary G
Can't Stay Away
Can't Stay Away
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:25 am


Re: Sir Chris Hoy

Postby Hume » Thu May 30, 2013 11:16 am

I don't blame the guy for wanting to keep out of it - he is very high profile and anything he says on the subject is going to be jumped on by those who think they can make a bit of political ground with it.

He is as well placed as anyone to assess the impact of Independence on team sports across the UK - he is probably spot on in fact. However, if this is the best reason for staying in the UK I am quite excited about the prospect of a Yes vote.

To abuse him for his comments is wholly unacceptable though - I agree with you Mary that the most extreme 'cybernats' do go over board with things like this and are of no help to the Yes Campaign. Come to think of it, what exactly a cybernat - am I one because I promote Independence online, or do you have to show a nasty streak in doing so?

Being serious again, you will no doubt know there is a nasty element on both sides of the debate - is there an equivalent word for 'cyberunionists' ?

Anyway, I see both Willie Rennie and the SNP have condemned these responses.
Should Scotland be an Independent country?

Yes, I believe Scotland is a country and should therefore govern itself.
No, Scotland is not a country it is simply part of the UK and should therefore be governed from London.
User avatar
Hume
Can't Stay Away
Can't Stay Away
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Cambuslang


Re: Sir Chris Hoy

Postby gizmo » Thu May 30, 2013 6:13 pm

I still haven't read or heard any of the comments, but I would be surprised if any of them were from anyone worth listening to.
In much the same way as comments made during any of the stories of the day, the knuckle-draggers are news worthy.
Soldier murdered in London, cue the deport the ragheads comments.
Alex Ferguson retires, enter the he was an unpleasant old bigot brigade.
On the death of an 80 year old ex-Prime Minister, Yeehaw I am having a street party.
The fact these people get reported doesn't mean their views are those of the right minded,it fills column inches nothing more. :|
gizmo
Can't Stay Away
Can't Stay Away
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 5:33 pm
Location: roonaboot


Re: Sir Chris Hoy

Postby Hume » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:17 pm

I was thinking more about this issue over the weekend with some of the stuff I was reading with some suggesting that Chris Hoy's comments may actual highlight how Scotland has suffered as part of the UK sport set up. So he says, competitors benefit from using facilities in (generally) England. Others could say, why don't we have these facilities ourselves?

Whilst is it nice to have elite athletes achieving at the highest level, maybe the top priority of an Independent Scotland should not be to produce another Chris Hoy but to treble or quadruple the number of young people in this country who compete in track cycling in the first ten years. That ambition should of course extend to all sports and whilst The Scottish Government does have control over some sport funding, it does not have total control over spending.

However, this thread was more about the reaction to Hoy's comments and Mary raised the issue of 'cybernats'. Governgirl, you questioned whether nationalists were attempting to silence people who disagree with them. I have to assume you were referring to 'Scottish nationalists' here, as most would, but take a look at the link below which addresses a number of issues, two of which have cropped up in this thread.

Is it the unionist who are really the nationalists? If so, what does that make many pro-Independence supporters - that's right, just plain only pro-Independence supporters. Many don't consider themselves nationalists at all - Patrick Harvie for instance - it is the media's tactic to associate Independence with nationalism, in the hope is discourages support.

Is it then the media who are trying to silence those who don't agree with them? The article below also addresses a couple of the issued I was thinking about when I contributed to the Mike Russell thread - that generally the media is so biased in favour of the No campaign, although there have been a couple of softening stances at The Herald, Sunday Herald and maybe even The Daily Record lately in my view. I've said before, that's fine for the printed press as it is privately funded and no-one is forced to buy newspapers. The BBC however is supposed to be balanced in its political coverage and it is not - it is a disgrace and its just not a level playing field. The fact we have even reached the stage where we have a referendum is a success.

Mary, you said something like its a shame the view of fair minded SNP / Independence supporters are not getting through. Have you considered why?

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/7496-scottish-unionism-british-nationalism-and-their-creeping-fascist-tendencies

Mentioned in the article is the story about the comments made by a former UK Cabinet member, ex Labour Chancellor no less Denis Healey. Only a day or so before The Scotsman decided to print a story about an MSP allegedly making comments about the merits of different transport methods, Mr Healy gave an interview, which other media outlets picked up on. Speaking about the impact of oil revenues on Scottish nationalism (even I have been affected) he said

I think we did underplay the value of the oil to the country because of the threat of nationalism but that was mainly down to Thatcher.


Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/may/29/scottish-independence-oil-healey

Of course, we know that now from the McCrone Report, which was classified as Top Secret and since the mid 70's we've had Labour and Conservative governments working in tandem to ensure the importance of oil revenues and what they could do for Scotland never became apparent to the public.

As a brief summary, the McCrone said
“lt must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps are taken either by carried interest or taxation to secure the government ‘take’.

“Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to quite an embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe with the exception of perhaps the Norwegian kroner”.


So what do you think is more befitting of a national newspaper - The Russell story or the Healey story? Only one appeared in The Scotsman, unless their search function is not working.

People of my age have been lied to our whole lives by successive UK Governments.

Better Together? Really?
Should Scotland be an Independent country?

Yes, I believe Scotland is a country and should therefore govern itself.
No, Scotland is not a country it is simply part of the UK and should therefore be governed from London.
User avatar
Hume
Can't Stay Away
Can't Stay Away
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Cambuslang



Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests