WHO IS INDY?
Who is Indy? This is all I know about the person who comments on my blog as 'Indy'.
Profile Not Available
The Blogger Profile you requested cannot be displayed. Many Blogger users have not yet elected to publicly share their Profile.
If you're a Blogger user, we encourage you to enable access to your Profile.
Today Indy posted the following in the comment section of my Take Care in Calais post:
Oh dear. It looks like Scottish Unionist was right.
You are undoubtably a racist Subrosa.
Someone suggests shooting asylum seekers - you say nothing.
Someone else suggests driving over them with snow chains with spikes out - you say good luck.
You may pose as a nice old dear but I am afraid you are actually rather a nasty piece of work.
I certainly won't be visiting this blog again and I would advise all SNP bloggers to remove all links to you. You give us a bad name.
I'm leaving his/her comment in place, although I could easily remove it, but feel I am entitled to respond. For those of you who are interested regarding her Scottish Unionist remark, I made a comment in a reply this weekend, to one of my readers, saying I'd complained to VisitScotland a few years ago, about their main switchboard being manned (is that appropriate these days?) by a woman with a strong Australian accent (as did many others at the time). The blogger ScottishUnionist immediately posted my comment on his own blog implying I was racist.
My blog does not discourage people writing their opinions and I do my best to at least acknowledge the fact they've bothered to comment. At times my replies are brief or non-existent because, like everyone, I have a life outside blogging. The two comments she quotes: one I didn't answer (because I actually didn't see it) and the other was a message of good luck (with any roadblocks.) If I 'd have had more time and had my mind entirely focused on my response, I may have also added 'ensure anyone with jewellery removes it, valuables are well hidden and money is safely stored'. I don't condone some of the views of Niko or OH and they know that.
If Indy wishes to label me as racist he/she is free to do so. I don't consider myself racist. It's such a shame he/she didn't email me to make his/her complaint because I could then tell him/her of a family I know well who have had their lives ruined by Calais migrants but that doesn't mean to say I approve of anyone using violence against them.
Some may condone the way migrants physically abuse innocent people, that's their choice. Some of my readers may have strong views or make silly comments but, because they are left in situ, that certainly does not mean I agree with them. I do my best to keep moderation to a minimum to avoid this becoming purely a blog for supporters of Scottish independence.
I certainly don't 'pose' as a nice old dear or 'pose' as anything. For those who read this blog and know me personally, they say I write much in the same way as I am in 'real' life, but I do mention being a pensioner I agree: retired, but not half-dead yet. It's only reasonable people realise my view is one from an older generation and therefore why it may differ from those of younger generations.
I find this outburst from Indy distressing mainly because I am accused of not doing anything.
Commenting on my blog with a hidden public profile and accusing me of being racist is cowardly and could perhaps be thought of as far worse.
Posts
37 comments:
Naldo said:
don't think you are a racist but i do find your obsession with immigration a bit bizarre from someone who supports independence for a small nation with an ageing and dwindling population.
Your links to stories in the Daily Mail (which openly supported Oswald Moseley 70 years ago, and is still a right wing rag) and to nasty little Englander blogs is also quite alarming.
Fascist and neo-nazi paties did very well in elections across Europe a few weeks ago. Verbal and physical attacks on Muslims in the UK are at an all time high. World economic conditions make it a prime time for parties of the extreme right to encourage desperate people to take desperate measures - recent events against the Roma population in and around Naples being the most obvious example.
These are dangerous times for minority groups and a willingness to pick up on any old tat writen in the Daily Mail can only give succour to those who dream of an ethnically pure Britain. Whatever the hell that is supposed to be.
Some of your priorities do seem strange to me as a fellow supporter of Scottish independence but it is your blog and of course, you're entitled to right and link to what you want. Nobody is compelled to read it.
I too would like to know who Indy is as i reckon we'd have a lot in common to talk about. Though i do reckon their comment above was over the top.
My apologies naldo, you posted the same comment twice and I thought I'd remove one. Both went!
I'll reply shortly.
SR,
I understand exactly where you're coming from. You have genuine concern over successive UK Governments' failure to address Immigration and Assylum.
Instead of looking after those that have contributed financially, spiritually and physically to building this country Scotland or/and England and have earned the right to receive support in time of need, ill health or retirement.
Others wishing to enjoy a better life strive to come to these shores to allegedly dilute the way of life and refuse to integrate and take whatever handouts that they can "swick" out of the generous nature of the UK social support system.
Is it a throw back from Colonialism and the Empire when the UK Imerialists forced their way of life onto the Globe? Perhaps? Are post Colonial countries doing better for their Imperial past? Growing strong economies...argue away, that doesn't concern me and I have no guilt for my forefathers behaviour and I'm not scholarly enough to express a factual opinion that would satisfy many of the incisive bloggers that habit this blog.
What does concern me is Pussies using the www for anonimity, no details, no pics, worried over being i.d'd. trying to exist "off the grid". Attack others' efforts to bring an opinion, perhaps different nonetheless, but free speech, ideas, thoughts and a political slant that cannot be provided by the Unionist Media that Scotland suffers from.
Subrosa, hold yer heid high, you're entitled to your opinion and for others to label someone as racist is an easy option, for many others that dare not confront or admit their prejudices or are so convinced that multiculturalism works in the UK or are brainwashed into thinking the pish that the Media pour forth.
We'd all like to live in a civilised society. Perhaps with Indpendence we have the chance of rebuilding that and correct many wrongs, we may not agree on everything but at least we have common purpose.
Saor Alba, heid up wifie (Doric sp)
Crazy D
I wouldn't worry, Subrosa; when someone - particularly someone who is as near as dammit anonymous - throws in the tired, traditional and irrelevant "racist" taunt, it only shows that they have no real arguments, and no real intelligence.
Subrosa,
I went back to look at what Indy wrote.
I can not see what is being described a racism at all.
Indy,
You said you would not return to Subrosa's blog but I feel you will make a return.
Remember Indy it is her blog.
Her opinions
Her moods
Her thoughts
Her blog has been attacked previous by an individual and from the outside it looks like you have a connection to that individual.
But having read her posts for many many months now, there is no way she is racist.
She is stating an opinion. Not a racist opinion, an opinion of fact.
Other leave comments about her post and she can choose to further comment on them or not.
She does not have to remove them.
The fact they are there is her choice.
And as a point of law here, an unmoderated comment section affords some protection. If you moderate, then you are deemed to be condoning what is not moderated. Therefore for blogger safety moderate nothing.
Those people are there, those people have committed those crimes. Some may well be from legitimate backgrounds generally wanting help but many many more are there for a UK state handout.
They need to go through a process.....that process may be wrong, but they need to go through it anyway.
And should anyone of these individuals arrive in the UK and be found to requre medical assistance then they would get it.
And lets be honest the French do not want them..........why build camps on the other side of France. Build them at these peoples point of access in France. They traverse France to get to the port and the Calais camp..
I do not agree with all Subrosas posts but it is her blog and I support her right to free speech.
The issue is you hide behind an anonymous name.
You do not allow anyone access to the mearest hint of your identity.
That makes you a coward.
You do not have your own blog.
You do not post your thoughts on your own blog!
You choose to come on someone other persons blog with a an agenda and a connection to another anonymous commenter with the sole effort to get your messgae out on the back of someone elses efforts. Not by reasoned debate but by cheap shots.
Get your own blog.
Get the courage of your anonymous mouth.
It will be your blog, your thoughts.
Put your money where your mouth is so to speak..............start your own blog.
And remember moderate nothing. For your own safety that is.
Hope to read it soon.
What he said ;¬)
Don't let the buggers get to you Subrosa. You have my, and others, total support.
What utter piffle from 'Indy'. Remember the old adage about sticks & stones SR.
I had taken a Gregorian vow not to participate in blogging during Jewish Lent, a la Jim Baxter, but I am forced to remove my carcass from the horizontal and rumble my tummy.
To the best of my knowledge SubRosa is not racist. I know her a little better (not biblically speaking that is, although I live in hope) than some of the other posters here.
I don't always agree with everything she says, although she speaks with some authority on military matters. Funnily enough some of my disagreements with her are on that subject but, I do believe she has any sinister of racist view, both in open and private mail exchanges.
Let me get my position straight, SubR is NOT racist although I suspect some of her detractors are by using this slur.
We always knew that the Empire Loyalists and their fellow travellers would become more strident the closer that separation becomes and there are a lot of dirty tricks yet to be hatched.
It proves to e that we are winning and the status quo Unionists are having to up their slimy game because they are losing.
It is a wee bit interesting and maybe pertinent that SubRs block is receiving honest comment from England and tip offs from some more (UK wise) bloggers.
She is beginning to be a nuisance to some anonymous "individuals" and I am not surprised that there would be smears to reduce he voice. Welcome to the most anti free press culture this side of China!
I am with you SubR!
They don't like it up them, you are now going mainstream and they see you as an enemy!
Fuckem!
Faux Cu, Indy(say it several times and quickly Numpty).
has no sinister or racist view,
Back to the horizontal then
I welcome these morons, Subrosa. The pleasure of screwing them, until The General Election, I find joyous!
Trolls are an unfortunate indication of a blog's growing popularity. Take it as a compliment, ignore them and move on.
:-)
subrosa,
Pay no heed to this stuff and nonsense about not replying to comments.
Quite a lot of bloggers, me included, do not always reply to comments but that's a long way from saying that you agree with the comments. For example, I know that a certain unionist blogger ignores my more outrageous comments.
I have seen a poster calling himself Indy on the Scotsman site but never really paid much attention so I must assume the comments were not impressive.
In the meantime, stay as sweet as you are!
I just can't reply to you all individually but I thank you ALL for your comments. They're very much appreciated believe me. Maybe I should just have deleted the comment but I'm not a person to avoid criticism, whether justified or unjustified.
I did have one email which suggested that 'Indy' posted this not only in order for people to withdraw links (as he or she mentioned), but as an attempt to persuade people not to put me in their top ten Total Politics blog wish list. I'll never know.
As for Iain Dale's TP blog list, I have no intention of publishing mine (once it's compiled) because I feel that would perhaps make some think I don't respect their writings and I do.
Perhaps I should just list 10 female bloggers in the hope that I'm called sexist!
Subrosa- If you were bland and uncontroversial I wouldn't have you on my list of daily reads. The Righteous shout "racist" at every opportunity in an attempt to silence anyone who disagrees with them. Mainstream politicians therefore don't dare to voice the opinions that are shared by so many people. This gagging of freedom of speech has indirectly aided the rise of the BNP. Ignore the detractors and keep up the good work.
Dear Subrosa
I pop in here regularly and I would say that you are not racist.
I would also say that I might not agree with every single thing you say but will read it anyway.
You can't please everyone, here is a comment directed at me on the Order Order website.
“No mercy for you, you sick, persecuting bastard. May your filth reach back and kiss you”.
Some people don't like my Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University.
Human Rights Campaigning, such fun!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Naldo, I'm going to reply to you because I said I would.
I have no obsession with immigration which is legally coming from another country to here as a permanent resident. Immigrants have correct papers, work arranged etc. I'm delighted to welcome these people because, as you say, Scotland does require a greater, younger, skilled workforce as we're not creating enough.
Illegal immigration is a difficult issue to define. There are many who come here because of the threat of loss of life in their own countries (asylum seekers) and I support the fact that, if their application is authentic, they are usually permitted to stay. Unfortunately the system we have to assess these cases needs a radical overhaul because the length of time cases take to be investigated is excessive.
My two posts were about illegal migrants, the type of person who destroys their papers and their identity then tells lies to get into this country. There are many. There are also some who will kill to get here. (See my reply to Niko on my precious post).
I don't know why you have a problem with the Daily Mail. Their past history doesn't concern me. If history did then I would hardly read any paper. You will note I never use DM articles which do not have named contributers who are then accountable for what they say. Perhaps you also note I seldom quote from Scotsman articles these days because the "a spokesman said" opt out is all too frequent.
To refer to some blogs I read as 'nasty little Englander' blogs is offensive. None of these blogs has ever referred to a Scottish blog as a nasty little Scotlander blog.
I don't want the Calais illegal migrants here. They are of no use to the society and well-being of this country.
I fervently support Scottish independence but I do not have to accept people who have nothing to contribute to my country.
Canada, the US and Australia all have much firmer systems for legal immigrants than the UK. They have stronger border controls to ensure that those of a dubious background are not admitted.
People who seriously assault innocent lorry drivers because they're discovered trying to get into the lorry have no place in my Scotland. They could have tried it the asylum route but they don't because of their criminal histories.
Thanks Jock and George. George, if you visit Guido's site surely you expect nothing less than total insult. Unfortunately the good debate on it has more or less gone these days.
If you know Indy's posts on other blogs it is quite clear that s/he posts from an SNP perspective, in fact the level of detailed discussion and analysis s/he gets into, and the way s/he frequently whips unionist butt is quite impressive. I reckon I know his/her handle on the Scotsman too; see above.
I am reading this that s/he is seeking to clearly distance the subrosa brand from the SNP.
subrosa you do have very different views on immigration from the SNP, but this is your blog as you say and you are entitled to post what you like.
But I have to say I found the comments that Indy took offence to offensive too. And I can understand why Indy clearly wants to distance the SNP from those kinds of views.
But then again you don't blog as an SNP member, so you have every right to make whatever point you like; because you are blogging as subrosa.
And quite frankly I do blame Scottish Unionist, and journalists such as Maddox and Fraser, for a lot of this. They insist on posting comments from ''cybernats'' and ''prominent nationalist bloggers'' to try and draw a picture of the SNP to fit *their* agenda. That we are some kind of sinister monocultural fascistic force who will brook no arguments from anyone else
These kind of spats, although unpleasant, prove that the supporters of independence are indeed a VERY broad church. So bloggers like SU, and journalists like Maddox, who think that conclusions can be drawn from *individuals* making their points known, about what an independent Scotland will be like, are proven to be in the wrong.
In an independent Scotland, we will continue to have different points of view, different parties, a lot of arguments, just like any other democratic country; but ultimately it will be the people of Scotland (of whatever ethnicity) who will decide the governance of Scotland.
So there I think is the point that we can all, however we may disagree about other things, agree on.
I used to get called a racist quite frequently on the Herald - and now on my blog as well. It's the last sanctuary of those losing the argument regarding immigration and multiculturalism. These folks masquerading as independence supporters demand all nationalists adhere to a strict catechism devised by themselves (and only read the approved newspapers).
Personally I'm quite willing to debate these trolls. but after pouring their invective over one's blog they scurry off while shouting over their shoulder: "and Ah wullnae be back" or words to that effect.
"Racist", "fascist", what they really mean is BLASPHEMER for their views are based on faith rather than reason. I get my revenge by winding them up with posts that must make them wish they knew a mullah that would issue a fatwa against me.
Keep on having fun while challenging the PC orthodoxy that's my way.
Sorry I just realised that what I said could be construed as thinking that subrosa supported the offensive posts, which is not what I meant at all, as I know she doesn't. It's just quite a big subject and I didn't clarify it enough.
Scunnert yeah right tell it to the marines. ''All Islam is evil'' you might think that's fun but I doubt that Scottish muslims do.
Observer are you calling on me to defend that statement? I thought I'd already done that with my last few posts. Christopher Hitchens analysis alone proves the point. Your welcome to dispute that analysis on that thread which, so far, no one has had the courage to do. Do you?
BTW Observer, islam and its adherents (Scottish or otherwise)deserve as much respect and sensitivity as any other religion - none.
Scunnert you can't seriously believe that people of religion don't deserve respect. You might not respect the religion, I certainly don't, but you have got to respect people who hold different views from yours, unless there is a good reason not too.
Anyway time to stop cluttering up this blog with our argument. I am not feart I just find some of the views you have expressed recently disturbing. I will look in on your blog and post, and there be done with it.
I don't demand respect from anyone just because I hold different views from them. On the contrary, I expect to be challenged and ridiculed - called a racist even. Why should "people of faith" demand that others respect their views without question, ridicule, or analysis?
No reason whatsoever scunnert. Thankfully the days have gone, to a degree, when respect was given totally unchallenged. We're of the generation who were taught exactly. It's good to see younger people question themselves about this, but of course peer pressure, as always, takes a fair share of any decision.
If the respondents to this post are representative of pro-Scottish independence thinking then i'm having serious doubts about breaking up the union. They are a frightening, illiberal mob with the notable exception of Observer.
I don't want to live in a country peopled like that.
Scunnert, of course everyone's views are open to question and we should all be free to say what we want about those views. But decent human beings should also consider the impact their words will have on all in their community. You seem intelligent and decent thus i am mystified as to why you think it's acceptable to poke fun at Islam when Muslims all around us are being persecuted on a daily basis.
I am an atheist, i would gladly ridicule all theistic faiths, but i realise that believers in those faiths are above all else human beings so i respect and cherish their existence. In the 1920's and 1930's it would have been wholly inappropriate to ridicule Jews because of their faith. The same is true today of Muslims.
Naldo, if you'd taken the time to check out the respondents, you would know that many have no concern with Scottish independence.
The posts about Calais are not about religion - did I mention religion? I don't think so because people's religion doesn't concern me unless it affect me directly.
I'm not getting into a discussion about religion; suffice to say it's not so long ago that in UK cities hotels used to have signs saying 'No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs.' Thank goodness our society has moved on a great deal since then.
Go to Norway. They put their own people in jobs first. As they do in The Netherlands and Switzerland amongst many others.
It should be the same for Scotland.
Subrosa, of course not all respondents to this post are pro-independence. I have not checked but I'm sure you'd expect to attract more pro-independence readers and commenters than most political blogs in the UK.
I'm surprised and disappointed at the tenor of comments from such a group. Most pro-independence types of my ken would be happy to expand the cultural mix within Scotland. We would not tend to link to right wing newspapers or right wing Conservative supporter's blogs to support our arguments (sorry if you don't like the term little Englander, on reflection, it is a bit lazy).
My comments on religion were specifically aimed at Scunnert for his remarks about fatwas and Islam being as ripe for ridicule as any other religion.
Naldo says:
"Scunnert, of course everyone's views are open to question and we should all be free to say what we want about those views. But decent human beings should also consider the impact their words will have on all in their community. You seem intelligent and decent thus i am mystified as to why you think it's acceptable to poke fun at Islam when Muslims all around us are being persecuted on a daily basis."
So it's okay to challenge ideas as long as it's not Muslim's ideas -which no "decent" person would do - but since I did ...?
I am unaware of: "Muslims all around us ... being persecuted on a daily basis". Perhaps you could supply some examples?
However, having grown up in the Glasgow area - the child of a "mixed marriage" - I am fed up to the eye teeth with religion - as I'm sure you can understand. I don't want to hear any more of it - I'm done with delusional thinking that ends up in sectarianism, discrimination, persecution, and genocidal madness.
If people want to believe nonsense I don't care as long as they keep it to themselves - I don't want to hear it. But no - we are subjected to a plethora of "associations" and "councils" pontificating on this, that, and the next thing and how it affects their particular "faith" community.
Why can't they just STFU?
Is this "insensitive"?
Naldo, so it's the fact I linked (and obviously read) the Daily Mail that's become your problem.
How do you know people who would wish for independence don't read the Mail or the Mail on Sunday? I can't believe that, this gets sillier.
I reiterate at least the articles I quote from the Mail have actual names connected with the comments and not like the Scotsman, who repeatedly quote a 'spokesman' against the Scottish government.
You're really missing my point Naldo. Is this to create debate or to try to trap me into saying something which can be misinterpreted? I'm becoming suspicious.
Your term little Englander could be translated in many ways. Think about it.
People in Scotland have always enjoyed a cultural mix, especially since the 50s. Some of the most enterprising in our country are immigrants or the children of immigrants.
I've had long conversations with you about all this and I think we'll have to agree to disagree on certain issues.
I do hope your work situation radically improves but, in the meantime, there's no harm in visiting the types of places I suggested before.
Sorry that 'Indy' has so clearly stepped over a line. Their commentary is usually of great interest and it downgrades their overall importance to take a personal pop like this. I really don't know who it is, but I have my suspicions. Play nicely. >:-(
Hi Mek. I've also respected Indy's comments in the past, but I was not prepared to accept this without responding.
I've no idea who they are although they obviously have their own agenda.
Oh, don't read the Daily Mail because you'll be called bad names. :-)
"Who is indy?"
What are you going to do with the information?
And why are you, indeed most of the above comments, so shocked that on nailing your colours to the mast you come under enemy fire?
Post a Comment