I've just had word, from a most reliable source, that the SNP has reached the £50,000 target required for the court case against the BBC.
Could any other political party raise that amount with such speed? Answers on a postage stamp please.
Well done everyone who contributed! This shows the BBC issue isn't just about politics but about morals.
Posts
13 comments:
Well good luck to them, I doubt they'll win though.
Meanwhile SNP leader Alex Salmond on BBC Radio 4′s PM programme said that he wanted to keep the option of voting on English matters ‘up his sleeve’ as one of the trump cards he might need to play to secure the SNP’s objectives. In other words, the SNP would be prepared to vote on English matters in some circumstances.
As the SNP would be more likely to support a more ‘progressive’ policy agenda than one of Tory cuts to public services does this mean they're prepared to prop up the hated Labour party in order to get their hands on some power?
I hope not, one of the things I've always respected about the SNP is that they don't vote on England only issues.
Subrosa
If a lot of the posts on the various blogs are to be believed a lot of non SNP members also contributed to this fund as they were fed up with the undemocratic way that the broadcasters, but particularly the BBC had acted.
The SNP should announce how much money they have received from non SNP members.
I believe that the BBC have really done themselves a lot of harm with this decision.
A lot of people who looked up to the BBC are now seeing them in a different light.
and the moral of the story is Alex salmonds vanity cost snp supporters 50000............which could be used more constructively or if you like to satisfy Salmonds colossal vanity a massive statue of himself to admire
the snp will loose the case of course(as they should) still another chip on the shoulder for the snp to point at
Mr.Mxyzptlk
You talk the same type of crap that Councillor Terry Kelly talks. In fact so similar is your mince that you could be him.
There are regulations in place so as to have a level playing field for all parties. These leaders debates are against the rules favouring the three main English parties over all other English, Scottish and Welsh etc parties.
If you think that is fair then you do not believe in democracy. As long as it does not affect your wee cult party then it is ok. What a plonker!
@ Billy
The three main "English" parties as you put it also field candidates in Scotland and Wales. So when are the SNP going to field seats in Kent or Cwmbran?
Point being these are "British" parties and you don't see parties like the English Democrats (fielding 100 candidates) invited to the debates either.
It almost doesn't matter now whether the SNP wins this case.
What matters is that the point has been well made regarding the BBC's unfair treatment of the SNP, which has not played well with many of the Scots public. The whole sorry mess has revealed a now very tangible and public example of the ongoing bias of the broadcaster against the SNP - something pro-independence bloggers and commenters have been discussing for months on here.
That the SNP reached its requested target of £50,000 in only a couple of days from those including non-party members and people who don't vote for the SNP, indicates a sizeable body of opinion out there who also agreed with the SNP's standpoint but maybe just don't have the money in their pockets to donate to something like this.
The fact that the speed of the money coming in was achieved largely through the pro-independence social media types all discussing it and sending links etc (I'm only familiar with the bloggers and commenters), should surely tell the MSM something about what is going on here. Are they getting it?
Pro-independence thinkers have turned to the blogosphere in their droves simply because there is so little decent coverage of news and politics in the MSM from our perspective. There is a virtual absence of it in fact - thank goodness for Joan McAlpine, Kenneth Roy and a handful of others!
This case, whether Alex Salmond wins or loses it, is another step towards alerting more people to what is really going on. More bloggers, more readers, more commenters, more campaign possibilities.
Anyone taking any bets on how long it will be before our esteemed Lords on the Labour benches start sniping about "Poisonous Cybernats gang up and pay up to prevent democratic debate on the EBC."
Looking forward to Conan the Librarian's take on this.
QM I'm sure you understand the SNP are now having to play in the muddy park with the others. They're not know for being dirty but realise that's the type of game it is.
I'm sure they don't want to vote on English matters either but it's a bargaining tool.
Maybe they will Dubbie. I do know they received money from non-members though.
I hope some of the English bloggers pick this up.
Vanity Niko? Rubbish. It's about good old Scottish morals, not the Brown type but the Scots type.
You've hit the nail on the head there QM, the SNP is a British party which governs a nation.
Really it is time we were independent and so was England. I can't be doing with the pettiness about a country's ruling party being kept out of this broken union's political scene.
Thanks for an excellent post Quinie.
Great news!
Quiet Man, while it's hypocritical of Salmond, he is offering the English populace a lifeline. Mutual back scratching.
Here we have a high-profile politician voicing our concerns - which have been muffled by the 'mainstream' parties. Yes, he's doing it for his own purposes, but we should take advantage of it.
It's in the interests of us all (except for the globalist troughers).
Quiet Man
The three Main parties are English parties - funded from England.
If it was the other way about with these parties being funded from Scotland then they would be Scottish parties as I am quite sure that the English quite rightly would be voting for parties funded from England.
There would be no Britishness about it in that situation. No other country in the world would vote for a party funded from another country.
Post a Comment