Here's an article from The Telegraph that shows -in my opinion, the subtle way a that the
media ridicule and down-play any serious views on corruption in regards of the Scottish
Independence Referendum.
'The SNP's very Scottish conspiracy...'
Christ, even the headline shout's 'tin-foil hat' straight out of the gate! So can we confirm
that this alleged conspiracy is 'very Scottish'?! I'll take it in good-faith that you don't actually
mean that Scotland has the monopoly on vote-rigging!
SOURCE:
'As its supporters insist that MI5 rigged the Scottish referendum, voting SNP now requires
faith in the unbelievable, says Andrew Gilligan.
With its tearooms and old-fashioned shops, the attractive town of Dunoon, in Argyll, seems
to epitomise Scottish moderation and common sense.
Making it sound quaint and therefore, mild and harmless... the manner of a minority.
But alongside the window displays of country wear and fresh mackerel, there are some much
weirder goods on offer...'
Weirder...?! Really? You've already took the p*ss with the 'window display/mackeral' comment
and yet, you still want to pile on the scorn that researchers of Area 51 are accustomed to!
But please, continue with your tongue-in-cheek description of a 1970's small Scottish village that
lies beyond the complex bureaucracy of domestic and foreign affairs. Maybe mention a chuckling
stream or the way the heather blows along a glen?!!
'...In the front window of Dunoon’s Scottish National Party campaign base, alongside posters
and canvassing information for the local SNP candidate, Brendan O’Hara, they’re displaying
for sale a new pamphlet which describes in detail how MI5 and John McTernan, chief of staff
to Jim Murphy, the Scottish Labour leader, “rigged” last year’s independence referendum by
creating thousands of fake No ballot papers.'
Well obviously it's a lie. Such a secretive act would be exposed by those who are elected
to make sure this kind of sinister plot could not happen. So... who would be watching in such
a cynical manner...? Who could be possibly doubting a fair exercise in democracy?
'...The authors, nationalist activists from Argyll, first suspected the existence of the “McTernan
Plan”, as they call it, on the night of the count...'
Oh I see, they're National Activists! We've named them...! Implying to the reader that there'
a certain 'sect' of people who may -because their title suggests, may have another agenda!
It's just a shame that nobody else believes in vote-rigging and also dare to think that it could
happen in a western, civilised nation.
'...Their “extensive canvass returns” had left them “confident of success” in the area, but when
the postal vote came in they were “astounded” to discover it was 70-30 against independence.
What’s more, the postal voter turnout in Argyll was 96.4 per cent. “We had never before heard
of such a high return in any democratic election,” they said...'
It could be nothing more than any research of the feelings in Argyll was wrong and since we
cannot confidently predict with certainty what people really think, we're left with the rational
and conformist view that everyone interested in the outcome was wrong.
'...The activists’ suspicions hardened when they learned that Mr McTernan, then a Labour
commentator, had appeared on TV four days before the referendum saying that “postal votes
are running very strongly towards No.”...'
I'll take that back, obviously there is a such a person!
'...“I couldn’t work out how it was possible to interfere on any scale with the postal ballot,” Andy
Anderson, one of the authors, told the Telegraph.
“You need the ballot paper number, the signature and date of birth of the voter.
Then it occurred to me. All that information went into a computer – and who’s at the other end of
the computer in London? MI5.”...'
And there you have it, the outcome was arrived at away from the original vote!
But come on... I mean, are you telling me that an agency of the 'English' Government subverted
a vote of another country to favour their masters?
Pakistan, Italy, Gabon, Korea and the USA, anyone?
The reality is that such acts are obviously secret and any interaction from the public with these
clandestine operations tends to only be shown in fictional books and movies.
Ergo, any claims that this occurs, opens up the claimant to comments that they're unable to
distinguish fact from fiction and this -to anyone reading or listening to a Journalist's interview
would be forced to believe it was all 'poppycock'... an english word meaning nonsense.
So to make sure the nails are firmly hammered into Mr. Anderson's coffin full of conspiracies,
the Journalist -Andrew Gilligan who's known for:
'Andrew Gilligan is London editor for the Sunday Telegraph.
He writes, among other things, about London, Westminster and politics.'
...explains how Andy Anderson must be incorrect.
'Rather more likely, of course, is that the Yes campaign’s canvas returns were wrong.
The overall No vote in Argyll and Bute was a convincing 58.5 per cent, on an 88.2 per
cent turnout, with the vast majority of votes cast in person.
Postal voters are often more conservative than in-person voters, since they are older
and more rural.
And postal vote turnouts are always higher than overall turnouts; those motivated enough
to apply for a postal vote are also more motivated to use it.
Mr McTernan’s foreknowledge is easily explained, too: though the postal votes were not
actually counted until referendum night, they were opened beforehand, with campaign
representatives present and able to peek at where people put their crosses.
The No margin of victory was almost 400,000 votes, so MI5 would have had to visit an
awful lot of postboxes.'
Yeah, that's why Mr. Anderson's claims must be wrong, huh?!
It's silly to think someone would act this way and therefore it's sillier to think these things.
The only crazier notion is to believe in them, so move along people... look, a celebrity!!
The saying that my quoted far above this post is still poignant when it comes to reading
counter-claim written in such an easy, cloyed manner.
'The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to
the intensity with which others are trying to prove him wrong.'
media ridicule and down-play any serious views on corruption in regards of the Scottish
Independence Referendum.
'The SNP's very Scottish conspiracy...'
Christ, even the headline shout's 'tin-foil hat' straight out of the gate! So can we confirm
that this alleged conspiracy is 'very Scottish'?! I'll take it in good-faith that you don't actually
mean that Scotland has the monopoly on vote-rigging!
SOURCE:
'As its supporters insist that MI5 rigged the Scottish referendum, voting SNP now requires
faith in the unbelievable, says Andrew Gilligan.
With its tearooms and old-fashioned shops, the attractive town of Dunoon, in Argyll, seems
to epitomise Scottish moderation and common sense.
Making it sound quaint and therefore, mild and harmless... the manner of a minority.
But alongside the window displays of country wear and fresh mackerel, there are some much
weirder goods on offer...'
Weirder...?! Really? You've already took the p*ss with the 'window display/mackeral' comment
and yet, you still want to pile on the scorn that researchers of Area 51 are accustomed to!
But please, continue with your tongue-in-cheek description of a 1970's small Scottish village that
lies beyond the complex bureaucracy of domestic and foreign affairs. Maybe mention a chuckling
stream or the way the heather blows along a glen?!!
'...In the front window of Dunoon’s Scottish National Party campaign base, alongside posters
and canvassing information for the local SNP candidate, Brendan O’Hara, they’re displaying
for sale a new pamphlet which describes in detail how MI5 and John McTernan, chief of staff
to Jim Murphy, the Scottish Labour leader, “rigged” last year’s independence referendum by
creating thousands of fake No ballot papers.'
Well obviously it's a lie. Such a secretive act would be exposed by those who are elected
to make sure this kind of sinister plot could not happen. So... who would be watching in such
a cynical manner...? Who could be possibly doubting a fair exercise in democracy?
'...The authors, nationalist activists from Argyll, first suspected the existence of the “McTernan
Plan”, as they call it, on the night of the count...'
Oh I see, they're National Activists! We've named them...! Implying to the reader that there'
a certain 'sect' of people who may -because their title suggests, may have another agenda!
It's just a shame that nobody else believes in vote-rigging and also dare to think that it could
happen in a western, civilised nation.
'...Their “extensive canvass returns” had left them “confident of success” in the area, but when
the postal vote came in they were “astounded” to discover it was 70-30 against independence.
What’s more, the postal voter turnout in Argyll was 96.4 per cent. “We had never before heard
of such a high return in any democratic election,” they said...'
It could be nothing more than any research of the feelings in Argyll was wrong and since we
cannot confidently predict with certainty what people really think, we're left with the rational
and conformist view that everyone interested in the outcome was wrong.
'...The activists’ suspicions hardened when they learned that Mr McTernan, then a Labour
commentator, had appeared on TV four days before the referendum saying that “postal votes
are running very strongly towards No.”...'
I'll take that back, obviously there is a such a person!
'...“I couldn’t work out how it was possible to interfere on any scale with the postal ballot,” Andy
Anderson, one of the authors, told the Telegraph.
“You need the ballot paper number, the signature and date of birth of the voter.
Then it occurred to me. All that information went into a computer – and who’s at the other end of
the computer in London? MI5.”...'
And there you have it, the outcome was arrived at away from the original vote!
But come on... I mean, are you telling me that an agency of the 'English' Government subverted
a vote of another country to favour their masters?
Pakistan, Italy, Gabon, Korea and the USA, anyone?
The reality is that such acts are obviously secret and any interaction from the public with these
clandestine operations tends to only be shown in fictional books and movies.
Ergo, any claims that this occurs, opens up the claimant to comments that they're unable to
distinguish fact from fiction and this -to anyone reading or listening to a Journalist's interview
would be forced to believe it was all 'poppycock'... an english word meaning nonsense.
So to make sure the nails are firmly hammered into Mr. Anderson's coffin full of conspiracies,
the Journalist -Andrew Gilligan who's known for:
'Andrew Gilligan is London editor for the Sunday Telegraph.
He writes, among other things, about London, Westminster and politics.'
...explains how Andy Anderson must be incorrect.
'Rather more likely, of course, is that the Yes campaign’s canvas returns were wrong.
The overall No vote in Argyll and Bute was a convincing 58.5 per cent, on an 88.2 per
cent turnout, with the vast majority of votes cast in person.
Postal voters are often more conservative than in-person voters, since they are older
and more rural.
And postal vote turnouts are always higher than overall turnouts; those motivated enough
to apply for a postal vote are also more motivated to use it.
Mr McTernan’s foreknowledge is easily explained, too: though the postal votes were not
actually counted until referendum night, they were opened beforehand, with campaign
representatives present and able to peek at where people put their crosses.
The No margin of victory was almost 400,000 votes, so MI5 would have had to visit an
awful lot of postboxes.'
Yeah, that's why Mr. Anderson's claims must be wrong, huh?!
It's silly to think someone would act this way and therefore it's sillier to think these things.
The only crazier notion is to believe in them, so move along people... look, a celebrity!!
The saying that my quoted far above this post is still poignant when it comes to reading
counter-claim written in such an easy, cloyed manner.
'The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to
the intensity with which others are trying to prove him wrong.'
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe.