NPR

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:57 am

Is that what you were looking for?

Pretty awful. I don't really understand the reason for it being so much higher, and I think it's difficult to say what'll be successful if you don't understand that. No doubt there are plenty of opinions out there but hard facts are not so easy to come by.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 12:12 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:57 am

Is that what you were looking for?

Pretty awful. I don't really understand the reason for it being so much higher, and I think it's difficult to say what'll be successful if you don't understand that. No doubt there are plenty of opinions out there but hard facts are not so easy to come by.

Indeed. That's absolutely shocking.

I grew up in Dundee and have a little bit of knowledge from voluntary work and reading about it since. Which is of course a dangerous combination as I'm far from an expert.

But, in Dundee it seems to be a mix of sh*t life syndrome causing addiction. And then street benzos being extremely cheap (as little as a quid a tab) mixed with harder stuff.

I think also people got used to the grim reality of it and didn't see how abnormal it was. Vividly remember my school being in the centre of town and walking in past boots which had the users collecting their methodone. Used to see people passed out in the streets and it wasn't unusual.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 12:12 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:57 am

Is that what you were looking for?

Pretty awful. I don't really understand the reason for it being so much higher, and I think it's difficult to say what'll be successful if you don't understand that. No doubt there are plenty of opinions out there but hard facts are not so easy to come by.

Indeed. That's absolutely shocking.

I grew up in Dundee and have a little bit of knowledge from voluntary work and reading about it since. Which is of course a dangerous combination as I'm far from an expert.

But, in Dundee it seems to be a mix of sh*t life syndrome causing addiction. And then street benzos being extremely cheap (as little as a quid a tab) mixed with harder stuff.

I think also people got used to the grim reality of it and didn't see how abnormal it was. Vividly remember my school being in the centre of town and walking in past boots which had the users collecting their methodone. Used to see people passed out in the streets and it wasn't unusual.

Blackmac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 3:20 pm The Scottish government have scored a horrific own goal in the way they record drugs death and it varies from every other country in the world. A drug death is recorded if there is the slightest suspicion that drugs may have contributed to the death, whether that contribution is significant or not.

A person dies in a car accident and is found to have a previous conviction for cocaine possession, drug death. A person commits suicide and is found to have a small amount of cannabis in their pocket, drug death.

All drug deaths are treated as suspicious and investigated by the CID and a post mortem is carried out and toxicology samples obtained and sent away for analysis. When I retired toxicology results were taking over 6 months, I believe it is now more.

When the result is eventualy obtained it is sent back to the investigating officer. If the toxicology result is completely negative the investigating officer should liase with COPFS to try and have the drugs death re classified. 6 to 10 months after the event an overworked detective has moved on and has at least 1000 more important things to do, so generally they just shrug their shoulders and go "so what, no skin off my nose".

Even if they are motivated to try and get it downgraded it is often impossible as the level of oversight is far too great and no one in the system wants to get accused of manipulating figures. The result is a perfect storm of totally exagerrated statistics

There are a small number of deaths which would be recorded by Scottish statistics but not in the rest of the UK, because of the way data is collected. For example, a person might intentionally overdose on a legal substance, but also have illegal drugs in their system. This would be counted in Scotland and not in England.

However this accounts for a small number of deaths each year (around three), so would not greatly affect the any comparison between the rest of the UK and Scotland.

Blackmac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 3:20 pm The Scottish government have scored a horrific own goal in the way they record drugs death and it varies from every other country in the world. A drug death is recorded if there is the slightest suspicion that drugs may have contributed to the death, whether that contribution is significant or not.

A person dies in a car accident and is found to have a previous conviction for cocaine possession, drug death. A person commits suicide and is found to have a small amount of cannabis in their pocket, drug death.

All drug deaths are treated as suspicious and investigated by the CID and a post mortem is carried out and toxicology samples obtained and sent away for analysis. When I retired toxicology results were taking over 6 months, I believe it is now more.

When the result is eventualy obtained it is sent back to the investigating officer. If the toxicology result is completely negative the investigating officer should liase with COPFS to try and have the drugs death re classified. 6 to 10 months after the event an overworked detective has moved on and has at least 1000 more important things to do, so generally they just shrug their shoulders and go "so what, no skin off my nose".

Even if they are motivated to try and get it downgraded it is often impossible as the level of oversight is far too great and no one in the system wants to get accused of manipulating figures. The result is a perfect storm of totally exagerrated statistics

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 5:00 pm

Blackmac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 3:20 pm The Scottish government have scored a horrific own goal in the way they record drugs death and it varies from every other country in the world. A drug death is recorded if there is the slightest suspicion that drugs may have contributed to the death, whether that contribution is significant or not.

A person dies in a car accident and is found to have a previous conviction for cocaine possession, drug death. A person commits suicide and is found to have a small amount of cannabis in their pocket, drug death.

All drug deaths are treated as suspicious and investigated by the CID and a post mortem is carried out and toxicology samples obtained and sent away for analysis. When I retired toxicology results were taking over 6 months, I believe it is now more.

When the result is eventualy obtained it is sent back to the investigating officer. If the toxicology result is completely negative the investigating officer should liase with COPFS to try and have the drugs death re classified. 6 to 10 months after the event an overworked detective has moved on and has at least 1000 more important things to do, so generally they just shrug their shoulders and go "so what, no skin off my nose".

Even if they are motivated to try and get it downgraded it is often impossible as the level of oversight is far too great and no one in the system wants to get accused of manipulating figures. The result is a perfect storm of totally exagerrated statistics

The content of your post seems to line up with a claim from nationalist blogger 'Hope over Fear' that Scottish drug deaths appear to be higher purely because of the way the data is collected. It looks like this is something that belongs firmly with the 'secret oilfields/GERS is a conspiracy' category of misinformation.

There are a small number of deaths which would be recorded by Scottish statistics but not in the rest of the UK, because of the way data is collected. For example, a person might intentionally overdose on a legal substance, but also have illegal drugs in their system. This would be counted in Scotland and not in England.

However this accounts for a small number of deaths each year (around three), so would not greatly affect the any comparison between the rest of the UK and Scotland.

https://theferret.scot/scotlands-drug-r ... omparable/

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 7:28 pm

Blackmac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 3:20 pm The Scottish government have scored a horrific own goal in the way they record drugs death and it varies from every other country in the world. A drug death is recorded if there is the slightest suspicion that drugs may have contributed to the death, whether that contribution is significant or not.

A person dies in a car accident and is found to have a previous conviction for cocaine possession, drug death. A person commits suicide and is found to have a small amount of cannabis in their pocket, drug death.

All drug deaths are treated as suspicious and investigated by the CID and a post mortem is carried out and toxicology samples obtained and sent away for analysis. When I retired toxicology results were taking over 6 months, I believe it is now more.

When the result is eventualy obtained it is sent back to the investigating officer. If the toxicology result is completely negative the investigating officer should liase with COPFS to try and have the drugs death re classified. 6 to 10 months after the event an overworked detective has moved on and has at least 1000 more important things to do, so generally they just shrug their shoulders and go "so what, no skin off my nose".

Even if they are motivated to try and get it downgraded it is often impossible as the level of oversight is far too great and no one in the system wants to get accused of manipulating figures. The result is a perfect storm of totally exagerrated statistics

That's absolutely moronic, has that always been the case with the recording methodology?

The Hope Over Fear post is incorrect to state that “people who have died due to a heart attack or car crash are included if they had any type of drug in their system, even if the drug did not contribute to their death.”

Car crashes are explicitly excluded from the definition of drug-related deaths, and heart attacks are included only if the underlying cause was listed as drug use.

Such differences may affect the comparability of drug-death rates for Scotland and the UK
as a whole, but are unlikely to account for the majority of the difference between those
rates. For example:
 if the numbers of drug-related deaths were rising at 10% per year, their being
registered (on average) six months earlier in Scotland than in England would
© Crown Copyright 2019
48
increase the Scottish drug-death rate by only 5% (relative to the English one), all
else being equal (because one would be comparing the Scottish number of deaths
which occurred, broadly speaking, in [say] 2015 with the English number of deaths
which occurred, broadly speaking, between [say] mid-2014 and mid-2015 – a period
when drug-death rates were lower).
 on average, Scotland had only around 3 deaths per year from intentional
self-poisoning by an uncontrolled substance for which a controlled substance was
present in the body but was not believed to have contributed to the death. Such
deaths are included in the drug-related death figures for Scotland, but not for
England – but are too few in number to have much effect on the comparability of
drug-death rates.
 ‘drug overdose’ and ‘opiate’ deaths in England are counted as drug-related/’misuse’
deaths, so the lack of information about which drugs were involved does not affect
the comparability of the overall drug-death rates. (However, it could have a
noticeable effect on any comparison of figures for deaths which were caused by
particular drugs, of course.)
It follows that the Scottish rate could well be at least 2½ times that of the UK as a whole
even if there were no methodological differences.

The subversion of history education in Scotland

No school subject lends itself more readily to political manipulation and propaganda than history. This is especially the case in Scotland, where the purpose of history education has changed beyond recognition since the SNP came to power.

The subject is no longer about encouraging critical enquiry and dispassionate analysis; it is there to guide the socialisation of children into Scottish society. This involves an emphasis on identity and empathy, with Scots cast as perpetual victims.

In the past, it was undoubtedly wrong that little Scottish history was taught in Scottish schools. Instead, there was a depressing emphasis on the world wars and Nazi Germany. Now, the balance has swung the other way, and Scottish history has pride of place in the Curriculum for Excellence. But it is history with a clear agenda.

Terminology, such as ‘English domination’ and ‘unfair’ is frequently used in teaching materials, despite this being emotional rather than evidence-based language. Paradoxically, Scots are also portrayed as ultimately triumphant, with the establishment of the devolved parliament and electoral victories by the SNP listed as recent victories.

From the moment a recognisable polity called ‘Scotland’ appears in the history books (during and after the wars of independence in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries) the curriculum portrays Scottish history as a long march towards nationhood.

Education Scotland recently created a ‘timeline’ of Scottish history to be used in classrooms, called ‘The Road to the Scottish Parliament’. According to the 27-page document, the evils of the English began with Edward I of England (1272-1307) and continue to the present. The document has a number of references to Scots being poorly treated by the English, and writes that 'for 800 years the Scots have been struggling against English oppression.’

Moreover, in this ‘timeline’ Scotland’s achievements within the Union, such as those during the Age of Enlightenment are disregarded, as is the participation of Scots in the British Empire, despite Glasgow’s position as the ‘second city of the Empire’. It is estimated that one third of slave plantations in the Caribbean were owned by Scots, while 75 per cent of tea planters in Sri Lanka were Scottish. But these facts do not fit the SNP’s narrative, and so are simply discarded. It is no wonder the document has been criticised by historians such as Sir Tom Devine, who has described it as ‘arrant propaganda’.

The Jesuits were believed to have said: ‘give me a child till he is seven and he is mine forever’. The SNP has learned this lesson well, although in its case it is, ‘give us a child till he is 16 and he will vote for us forever’.

Often the anti-English grievances peddled in the Scottish education sector are pure mythology. There are Scottish nationalists who clearly regard the film Braveheart – which appears on Education Scotland’s timeline – as a documentary rather than the parody it undoubtedly is.

The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA), the government’s awards and accreditation agency, was recently found to be prescribing credit to pupils who wrote that Winston Churchill sent tanks and thousands of English soldiers to Glasgow in 1919 to suppress a demonstration. However, this is a long-standing historical myth. While the Sheriff of Lanarkshire deployed police against the protestors and Scottish soldiers were on standby – after a panic about insurrection in the wake of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia – there were no tanks and no English soldiers in Glasgow’s George Square, where the demonstration took place. Winston Churchill was also not involved in the incident.

Nevertheless, this myth not only made its way into Scottish exams, but also appeared on Education Scotland’s historical timeline. To scotch this vexatious lie, the authorities should prescribe the work of the historian Dr Gordon J Barclay, whose painstaking research has demonstrated that the victimhood myth of the ‘Battle of George Square’ is what we call fake news.

The SNP has a similarly cavalier approach to its own history. After Alex Salmond was charged in 2018 with sexual offences (and subsequently found not guilty), he was completely written out of the SNP’s official history on its website.

In the SNP’s version of history, Nicola Sturgeon is credited with leading the campaign for Scottish secession in 2014. But the man who had been party leader for most of the previous quarter of a century, and who first led the SNP into government in Scotland in 2007, does not get a single mention. If anything resembles the air-brushing of Trotsky from photographs of Bolshevik leaders at Stalin’s behest, this is it.

There is a further resemblance to the Bolsheviks in the way that the Scottish education secretary, John Swinney, regularly proclaims that Scottish schools have overfulfilled their quotas for tractor production. Well, not quite. But facts such as a fall in exam pass rates and the failure to narrow the attainment gap between schools in affluent and deprived areas are glossed over by Swinney with good news of ‘steady, incremental gains in attainment across the broad general education… according to international experts’. In reality, Scottish schools have fallen down the PISA international rankings – and now score lower than English schools in key subjects. The Scottish government has also abandoned its Survey of Literacy and Numeracy, because the results were becoming embarrassing. According to Professor Lindsay Paterson, ‘Scottish education is now a data desert’. What you do not measure cannot be assessed and shown up for the failure that it is.

History in Scotland has become a political tool for the embedding of a particular kind of Scottish identity, an emphatically nationalist one. It is one where virtue is ascribed to Scots, who are portrayed as being morally superior to English people. You can hear it every time Nicola Sturgeon claims (unjustifiably) that her government has dealt better with Covid than the government in the UK. History is used by Scottish nationalists to present a picture of a victimised but plucky nation struggling for centuries against a larger ‘neighbour’, but in the end succeeding against the odds. It is what we used to call, in German history, ‘looking forward to a better past’.

WRITTEN BY
Jill Stephenson
Jill Stephenson is Professor Emeritus of Modern German History at the University of Edinburgh

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 7:46 am Whilst there are some worrying things in there, I find it a little far fetched that the SNP are actively trying to promote this or remotely capable of pulling it off

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:08 am Jill Stephenson has form, her extreme views and utter hatred of anything to do with the SNP or Scottish nationalism is easy to source. Wasn’t she the one who called Mhairi Black a slut a few years ago?

She and others seem to be unable to differentiate between being pro Scottish and being anti English. Surely teaching kids about their own history is a good thing? as long as it’s warts and all.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:43 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:08 am Jill Stephenson has form, her extreme views and utter hatred of anything to do with the SNP or Scottish nationalism is easy to source. Wasn’t she the one who called Mhairi Black a slut a few years ago?

She and others seem to be unable to differentiate between being pro Scottish and being anti English. Surely teaching kids about their own history is a good thing? as long as it’s warts and all.

'800 years of English oppression' seems pretty clear cut anti-English, no?

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:48 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:43 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:08 am Jill Stephenson has form, her extreme views and utter hatred of anything to do with the SNP or Scottish nationalism is easy to source. Wasn’t she the one who called Mhairi Black a slut a few years ago?

She and others seem to be unable to differentiate between being pro Scottish and being anti English. Surely teaching kids about their own history is a good thing? as long as it’s warts and all.

'800 years of English oppression' seems pretty clear cut anti-English, no?

And historical nonsense becoming the Scottish mainstream teaching,

Evil.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:43 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:08 am Jill Stephenson has form, her extreme views and utter hatred of anything to do with the SNP or Scottish nationalism is easy to source. Wasn’t she the one who called Mhairi Black a slut a few years ago?

She and others seem to be unable to differentiate between being pro Scottish and being anti English. Surely teaching kids about their own history is a good thing? as long as it’s warts and all.

'800 years of English oppression' seems pretty clear cut anti-English, no?

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:57 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:43 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:08 am Jill Stephenson has form, her extreme views and utter hatred of anything to do with the SNP or Scottish nationalism is easy to source. Wasn’t she the one who called Mhairi Black a slut a few years ago?

She and others seem to be unable to differentiate between being pro Scottish and being anti English. Surely teaching kids about their own history is a good thing? as long as it’s warts and all.

'800 years of English oppression' seems pretty clear cut anti-English, no?

I don’t know enough about what’s being taught in Secondary school history but is this literally what is being taught or her interpretation? I find it hard to believe that the entire Scottish education system and all of the history teachers would be prepared to use such language without question or challenge. I’ll have to ask my S1 age son about what’s being taught.

Seriously, look her up, she’s a nutcase.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:43 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:08 am Jill Stephenson has form, her extreme views and utter hatred of anything to do with the SNP or Scottish nationalism is easy to source. Wasn’t she the one who called Mhairi Black a slut a few years ago?

She and others seem to be unable to differentiate between being pro Scottish and being anti English. Surely teaching kids about their own history is a good thing? as long as it’s warts and all.

'800 years of English oppression' seems pretty clear cut anti-English, no?

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:58 pm Things I have being told completely straight faced by nationalists:

1. Churchill sent in tanks to crush 'Red Glasgow'
2. Churchill planned to abandon Scotland to the Nazis in the event they invaded err South East England in 1940.
3. The 51st Highland division was deliberately left behind in France in 1940.
4. Scotland was and still is a colony of the British empire.

Its fucking nuts.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:10 pm https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/c ... on-3065384

Key bits:
On Wednesday, this despicable, dishonest, crude propagandist “timeline” was removed from the Education Scotland website – an admission of guilt. A spokesman for Education Scotland said primly that it was to ensure “our resource is not open to misunderstanding or misinterpretation”. Aye, right.


Sir Thomas Devine denounced it as “arrant propaganda” and “dangerous nonsense”. Professor Chris Whatley of Dundee University described it as a “perversion of history… frightening as it was blatantly political and clearly designed to support the cause of Scottish independence”.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:14 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:10 pm https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/c ... on-3065384

Key bits:
On Wednesday, this despicable, dishonest, crude propagandist “timeline” was removed from the Education Scotland website – an admission of guilt. A spokesman for Education Scotland said primly that it was to ensure “our resource is not open to misunderstanding or misinterpretation”. Aye, right.


Sir Thomas Devine denounced it as “arrant propaganda” and “dangerous nonsense”. Professor Chris Whatley of Dundee University described it as a “perversion of history… frightening as it was blatantly political and clearly designed to support the cause of Scottish independence”.

Still not the document itself, seeing as it’s been withdrawn. I wouldn’t trust Brian Wilson’s opinion on anything tbh, he’s one of the most rabid SNPBAAAAAAADDDD mouthpieces that’s available. Shame we can’t see what was in the original, I’d like to understand what the fuck was going on. None of us achieve that by only listening to the more rabid voices from one side.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:03 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:57 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:43 pm

'800 years of English oppression' seems pretty clear cut anti-English, no?

I don’t know enough about what’s being taught in Secondary school history but is this literally what is being taught or her interpretation? I find it hard to believe that the entire Scottish education system and all of the history teachers would be prepared to use such language without question or challenge. I’ll have to ask my S1 age son about what’s being taught.

Seriously, look her up, she’s a nutcase.

The paragraph reads
Education Scotland recently created a ‘timeline’ of Scottish history to be used in classrooms, called ‘The Road to the Scottish Parliament’. According to the 27-page document, the evils of the English began with Edward I of England (1272-1307) and continue to the present. The document has a number of references to Scots being poorly treated by the English, and writes that 'for 800 years the Scots have been struggling against English oppression.’

So her inference is that it is in the document from Education Scotland itself. I'm happy to be corrected as I haven't read it myself.

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:17 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:03 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:57 pm

I don’t know enough about what’s being taught in Secondary school history but is this literally what is being taught or her interpretation? I find it hard to believe that the entire Scottish education system and all of the history teachers would be prepared to use such language without question or challenge. I’ll have to ask my S1 age son about what’s being taught.

Seriously, look her up, she’s a nutcase.

The paragraph reads
Education Scotland recently created a ‘timeline’ of Scottish history to be used in classrooms, called ‘The Road to the Scottish Parliament’. According to the 27-page document, the evils of the English began with Edward I of England (1272-1307) and continue to the present. The document has a number of references to Scots being poorly treated by the English, and writes that 'for 800 years the Scots have been struggling against English oppression.’

So her inference is that it is in the document from Education Scotland itself. I'm happy to be corrected as I haven't read it myself.

It’s all about context. You, and I, would have to read all the documentation to get the full story. Do you deny that there have been instances in the past 800 years where Scotland/Scots have been poorly treated? I’m sure there are also references to instances of Scotland/Scots being the oppressors. You can’t just cherry pick to try and make a point and that’s exactly what she would do knowing her views. All history should be taught - events of which we should be proud of and ashamed of and angry about.

We can’t airbrush awful things that happened from our history just because of our current individual political views.

Also, To address another point made here - I have heard some ludicrous guff passed off as fact from unionists, but that doesn’t mean that I think that’s what ALL unionists believe.

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:17 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:03 pm

Tattie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:57 pm

I don’t know enough about what’s being taught in Secondary school history but is this literally what is being taught or her interpretation? I find it hard to believe that the entire Scottish education system and all of the history teachers would be prepared to use such language without question or challenge. I’ll have to ask my S1 age son about what’s being taught.

Seriously, look her up, she’s a nutcase.

The paragraph reads
Education Scotland recently created a ‘timeline’ of Scottish history to be used in classrooms, called ‘The Road to the Scottish Parliament’. According to the 27-page document, the evils of the English began with Edward I of England (1272-1307) and continue to the present. The document has a number of references to Scots being poorly treated by the English, and writes that 'for 800 years the Scots have been struggling against English oppression.’

So her inference is that it is in the document from Education Scotland itself. I'm happy to be corrected as I haven't read it myself.

It’s all about context. You, and I, would have to read all the documentation to get the full story. Do you deny that there have been instances in the past 800 years where Scotland/Scots have been poorly treated? I’m sure there are also references to instances of Scotland/Scots being the oppressors. You can’t just cherry pick to try and make a point and that’s exactly what she would do knowing her views. All history should be taught - events of which we should be proud of and ashamed of and angry about.

We can’t airbrush awful things that happened from our history just because of our current individual political views.

Also, To address another point made here - I have heard some ludicrous guff passed off as fact from unionists, but that doesn’t mean that I think that’s what ALL unionists believe.

Some people hate the English, I don't. They're just wankers. We, on the other hand, are colonised by wankers. We can't even find a decent culture to be colonised by.

Blackmac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:59 pm Joe Fitzpatrick MSP has just been on 'Scotland tonight'. In summary "the problems stem from way before we came to power, we have no idea how to deal with it, but I can state that it is not the governments fault." It was pathetic.

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:37 pm Im not her biggest fan but seems more like a careless mistake than simply ignoring the rules as Cummings or Ferrier did.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:35 pm I see even Sturgeon isn’t following the COVID rules.

I’m sure the apologists will be along shortly, it’s probably Thatchers fault.

Jock42 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:52 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:35 pm I see even Sturgeon isn’t following the COVID rules.

I’m sure the apologists will be along shortly, it’s probably Thatchers fault.

What's she done?

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:01 pm That the 51st being 'abandoned' hasn't been killed off astonishes me, the most basic look at the facts would show it for the complete bollocks it is.

Blackmac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 11:00 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 1:01 pm That the 51st being 'abandoned' hasn't been killed off astonishes me, the most basic look at the facts would show it for the complete bollocks it is.

It has to be honest, by anyone with just a passing interest in WW2. The most usual bastardisation of the tale is that the 51st were chosen as the rearguard at Dunkirk because they were the most ferocious fighters. It's always funny to see these people's faces when you point out that they wreren't anywhere near Dunkirk