Save Our Saltire

Dave Coull · Save Our Saltire

The Tory-led administration on Angus Council, with the support of the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats, is seeking to remove the Saltires which have flown from county buildings in all Angus towns for longer than the lifetime of some younger voters. This is a politically-motivated move, because they identify the Saltire as being the SNP flag. Now, of course, the Saltire is NOT the flag of the SNP, it belongs to all of us. The "non-political" thing to do would have been for the Tories, LibDems, and Labourites to say "it's OUR flag too". By seeking to take down the Saltires, THEY have made this a political issue.

In response to this attempt to take down the Saltire, a "Save Our Saltire" campaign has been formed. This is NOT run by the SNP, but is non-party-political. We will be on the streets of every town in Angus tomorrow, Saturday the 29th September, seeking public support. I personally would have preferred to be in Montrose, but there were plenty of folk to cover Montrose and not enough for Brechin. If anybody wants to help, please e-mail me at davecoull@btinternet.com

Dave Coull

Although a lot of folk in the county of Angus are displeased about the decision of the Tory-led administration, with the support of the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats, to remove the Saltires which have flown from municipal buildings in all Angus towns for longer than the lifetime of some younger voters, the initiative for the Save Our Saltire campaign came from nineteen year old Carrie Ogilvie from Montrose. Some supporters of her non-party-political initiative were on the streets of Montrose, Arbroath, Forfar, Carnoustie, Kirriemuir, and Brechin yesterday, asking people to sign a "Save Our Saltire" petition. The response in Arbroath was particularly good, with Montrose also excellent. Brechin less so, but that may be partly due to the lack of a "focus". In Brechin there were just two of us, myself and and Raymond, and since Raymond is somewhat handicapped it was in fact just myself collecting signatures while Raymond waved mini-Saltires and handed them out. There is no doubt we could have collected a lot more signatures if we'd had a few more volunteers. For instance, I saw a group of football supporters hurrying to the Brechin versus Raith Rovers match, and managed to get one of them to sign. They were in a hurry, but if we'd had a couple more folk with signature sheets on clipboards, instead of just me, we could have got that whole group to sign. Maybe we could have collected more signatures if our available manpower had all been concentrated in Arbroath and Montrose, but we wanted to be able to say that we had signatures from every town in Angus. Nevertheless, adding all of these towns together, a few thousand signatures were in fact collected in just a couple of hours on one day. That shows the strength of feeling about this issue. The petitions will be presented to Angus Council later this week. If they don't change their tune, then the next stage could be going around chapping on doors collecting signatures, rather than just on the streets. If we do have to do that, it would be good if we could have some more volunteers!

agentmancuso

Why does it matter?

Dave Coull

Agentmancuso asked "why does it matter?"

It probably doesn't matter to you, or to a lot of other people, and I won't try to persuade you that it should. It matters to me for a number of reasons. First of all, I was born in Angus, raised in Angus, started full time work aged fifteen in Angus, I named my son Angus, and I live now in the county of Angus. That gives me a certain personal stake in this.

According to legend, which does appear to have at least a certain amount of basis in historical fact, the Saltire, the flag of Saint Andrew, the white diagonal cross on a blue background, comes to us from Angus. To be precise, from Angus Mac Feargus, King of Alba, who is said to have seen this peculiar cloud formation against a blue sky right before a battle with Athelstane, King of Northumbria, and pledged that if successfull he would give thanks to Saint Andrew, and make this the symbol of Alba.

The heartland of King Angus was, of course, the county which still bears his name. The symbol which he adopted has flown over the county of Angus for the entire lifetimes of some of our younger voters. Although it was the SNP that initially put it there, it is not seen as being the SNP's flag, but the flag of the people. The Tory/Labour/Liberal Democrat administration of Angus has used its one vote majority to push through taking down the Saltire, and they have been totally stunned by the reaction from people who are NOT in the SNP. They are starting to talk about a "two flags" solution. But this is merely a way of defusing their own enormous blunder. Their coalition is weakening on this particular issue and can be defeated by popular protest.

The flag which they are seeking to foist on us, the alleged "Angus" flag, is nothing of the sort. It is a modern invention, an artificial device for no other purpose but to be an excuse to remove the Saltire. This hodge-podge of a flag includes the coats of arms of four different feudal families who lorded it over the people of Angus. One of these four families is the Umfravilles. Sir Gilbert De Umfreville, Baron of Prudhoe, enemy of the Scottish people, foe of Wallace, supporter of Edward the First (the Hammer of the Scots) was made Earl of Angus by (English) Royal Decree. He would be laughing in his Anglo/Norman grave if he knew that by the decree of the Tory/Labour/Liberal Democrat administration his family crest is again to fly over the region, and the Saltire is again to be banished. As for the other three prominent families, they may be more Scottish, but the whole exercise stinks of getting us to touch our forelocks to our feudal masters. That flag can never be acceptable to fly over us.

agentmancuso

Holebender

Yes, I'm sure elected councillors all over the land spend their time thinking up expensive wheezes to wind up voters while using up some of that pesky money they have to get rid of every year because the public just keeps on sending them more and more. Three cheers for Angus Council and their jolly jape.

It seems those without councils to amuse themselves with find alternatives, like posting one-liners to annoy the denizens of online fora.

Dave Coull

Agentmancuso wrote "Maybe they thought it would be fun to wind up the sort of cranks who think flags important?"

No, you are ascribing your own motives to a group of folk with very different motivations.

A "crank" is a "person of eccentric or obsessive views". Your own views, Agentmancso, would be regarded as decidedly cranky by most people. In any case, far from it being "eccentric" to think flags important, it is an easily verified fact that a huge percentage of the population of the world attaches considerable significance to which flag they live under. Many people, for instance, attach considerable significance to the British flag, the Union Jack. In the USA, it is against the law to disrespect the American flag. Similar "obsessions" can be found in countries throughout the world. By definition, a characteristic shared by billions of people can not be "eccentric".

The group of folk to whom you attribute this motive almost certainly didn't include any who were motivated solely by a desire to "wind up", but it almost certainly DID include folk with a variety of different motivations. For instance, some of the more conservative councillors (I use "conservative" with a small "c" here, to include both those who are members of the Tory party and some of those who claim to be "independent") probably do, as well as wanting to pull the Saltire down, feel some sort of respect for the symbols of feudal families. The Labour Party members of the coalition are possibly less likely to feel any attachment to the symbols of these "great" families as such. They probably just went along with the daft idea because it was made a condition of having the coalition at all, and they have almost certainly been totally stunned by the reaction to their acquiescence in this.

agentmancuso

agentmancuso

Dave Coull

A "crank" is, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, a "person of eccentric or obsessive views". Agentmancso, who intruduced this term into this discussion, would no doubt be regarded as a "crank" by most people. Far from it being "eccentric" to attach some significance to which flag we live under, it is an easily verifiable fact that a huge percentage of the population of the world attaches considerable significance to which flag they live under. If you doubt this, just try telling the population of India that it would make no difference to them if the Indian flag was to be pulled down and the Union Jack raised once more over the British Raj. Or try telling the inhabitants of any Muslim country that it wouldn't matter if Islamic symbols were to be pulled down and a Christian cross raised in their place. It may be TRUE that in practice it makes little difference to the average inhabitant of India whether India is under the Indian flag or the Union Jack, it might even be TRUE that it would make little practical difference to the average inhabitant of an Islamic country if they lived under Christian rule, but that is beside the point. The point is not whether these things are true or not, but that the majority of the inhabitants of India, and the majority of the inhabitants of any Islamic country, would perceive things rather differently. Regardless of whether their belief is true or not, it is a fact that it is those who hold the opposing view who are the eccentric ones, and therefore, by extension, the "cranks".

Agentmancuso writes "That's one definition" - no, that is, according to the Oxford English dictionary, THE definition. You may want to be like Humpty Dumpty in Alice Through The Looking Glass and say that words mean whatever you choose them to mean, but in the real world that makes communication impossible. We are using the English language. The Oxford English Dictionary is a more reliable source of the meaning of words than yourself, Agentmancuso.

Agentmancuso continues "a huge percentage of the world's population are simpletons" - I think that is a rather harsh view of the human species, but, in any case, a widely held view, arguably a majority view, can not be a "crank" view, since, by definition, a majority view can not be "eccentric". For example, at one time a majority of the population of the world believed the world to be flat. They were mistaken in this belief, but, nevertheless, at the time when this belief was so widely held, it seemed to fit their experience, and it was those who denied that the world was flat who were seen as "cranks".

Dave Coull

Agentmancuso asked "Why do you think they have acted in this way, if not to annoy the outgoing SNP group?" - as already explained, that curious alliance of councillors of different political parties probably had various different motives for their action. However, I do not for one minute believe that any politician who hopes one day to be re-elected, or even perhaps to progress to a higher status in a political career, actually intends to "wind up" the electorate to whom they are answerable. Yet that is, in fact, what they have done. While they may have expected opposition from the SNP, their own statements, as reported in the local press, prove just how deeply they are shocked by the far wider, and unexpected, hostile reaction to their blunder.

agentmancuso

I appreciate your taking the trouble to repeat yourself ad nauseam, but I remain of the opinion that 'a crank' can quite usefully be defined as someone with an unhealthy or obsessive interest in things of little intrinsic merit.

I am unsure how exactly you hope to disprove my suggestion that worrying about flags is unhealthy by voluntarily associating this concern with suicide bombers, religious fundamentalists and tribal warriors.

All over the world, the people who obsess about flags (and similar tribal imagery) are the same people who dislike foreigners and resort to violence as a way to pursue political aims. As a rule, they ain't big readers either.

agentmancuso

Dave Coull

As pointed out before, Agentmancuso would undoubtedly be regarded as a "crank", using the Oxford English Dictionary definition and not his own Humpty-Dumpty-In-Alice-Through-The-Looking-Glass definition, by large numbers of people. Personally, I don't care whether some folk regard me as a "crank" or not. At one time most people believed the Earth was flat, and those who said it was round were regarded as cranks. My concern is with the truth.

Agentmancuso wrote "I am unsure how exactly you hope to disprove my suggestion that worrying about flags is unhealthy" - if that is what you were trying to say previously, this was not clear, since you expressed yourself badly. What I said in response to your poorly expressed view was that billions of people throughout the world exhibit a concern for which flag they have to live under, and, by definition, a concern shared by billions of people can not be regarded as "eccentric". It may be mistaken, but it cannot be eccentric. As regards what you are saying NOW , that is different from what you said before. Perhaps it isn't different from what you _wanted_ to say before, but it is different from what you actually said. Having disproved what you were saying before, I'm not going to bother with what you are saying now.

In response to me pointing out (again) that the odd alliance of councillors of very differenty political views probably included folk with different motives, Agentmancuso says "It's an unsupported assertion".

It is supported by things they have themselves said, some of which have been quoted in the local press. Local people here know it is not an unsupported assertion. I couldn't care less whether you do or not, your views on this matter are of no practical consequence.

agentmancuso

Dave Coull

Having so clearly lost the argument, Agentmancuso resorts to going down the path of personal abuse so well-trod by so many losers-of-arguments : "It might come as news to you, and the rest of the facepainters, but the truth is that the world is not flat".

(1) I have never painted my face in my entire life, and never would

(2) As previously stated, my point regarding Flat Earthists was precisely that at one time most people believed the Earth was flat, _and they were wrong_ . Yes, the majority can be wrong, and often is. But what the majority can NOT be, by definition, is eccentric/crank.

agentmancuso

Still no inkling as to other possible explanations? Is it a secret? Do I have to go to Arbroath myself and buy a fish supper just to get a look at what was said in last weeks paper?

I'm not surprised you sympathise with Flat Earthers. They no doubt had a thing for tribal totems too.

Dave Coull

Having so clearly lost the argument, Agentmancuso has chosen the resort of bad-argument-losers everywhere and gone down the path of personal abuse. He wrote "It might come as news to you, and the rest of the facepainters, but the truth is that the world is not flat". I pointed out that, at the age of sixty six, I have never painted my face in my life, never intend to do so, and also I am well aware that the Earth is not flat.

Agentmancuso now writes "I'm not surprised you sympathise with Flat Earthers".

As already explained, I don't.

The first time, giving Agentmancuso the benefit of the doubt, I assumed he had simply made a mistake. But having had his mistake pointed out, his persisting in stating what he knows to be an untruth becomes a lie. Agentmancuso is a liar. UNLIKE what he said about me, that is NOT an inaccurate statement, and it is NOT mere personal abuse. It is simple, easily verifiable, fact.

The Save Our Saltire campaign is a campaign in the county of Angus. It has widespread support in the county of Angus. Some of the clumsy councillors who first decided to take down the Saltire in the county of Angus are now back-tracking like mad. Since the campaign is gaining widespread support in the county of Angus, there is nothing we need to prove to Agentmancuso, whose opinions on this topic are totally irrelevant. Nevertheless, I personally was prepared to be polite to Agentmancuso. But now that he has dragged the discussion down to the level of personal abuse, and also now that he has revealed himself to be a persistent liar, there is no point in further discussion with him.

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "The old story of glass houses and stones comes to mind" - that story is completely irrelevant. It would only be relevant if one person was calling another a "crank" while denying the application of this term to themselves. The actual position is that I have pointed out that the term "crank" is relative. It depends very much on what is seen as being the majority view, and what is seen as being the majority view varies with both time and place. According to a view widespread throughout the world at one time, anybody who said the world was round was a "crank". Being a "crank" is not necessarily being wrong, it is merely being out of tune with the majority. I would say that both Agentmancuso and myself hold views which some folk would regard as "crank". But so far as the county of Angus is concerned, the view that the Saltires which have flown here for longer than the lifetimes of many younger voters should not be removed is far too widespread a view to be decribed as "crank".

"Agent has not, to the best of my knowledge, been described as 'dotty' and 'eccentric' (an 'eccentric Braveheart' indeed!) by a national newspaper" - these words are matters of opinion, and since my solicitor has written to that so-called "newspaper" on my behalf, and we are currently awaiting their reply, I will only say that article was extremely inaccurate on matters of fact (not opinion). I have never described myself as a "Braveheart", that was _their_ word. They even asked me what my favourite film was, clearly angling for that answer. I told them that I didn't have a "favourite" film, but my general preference was for romantic comedies. As for Agentmancuso, who knows what he has been described as? Since, like yourself, he is one of those shy persons who hides behind a false name, for all we know, he could have, under his real name, been described as far, far worse things than these.

But all of this is largely irrelevant, because your analogy is irrelevant.

"Either way, I agree with him to some extent. I'd rather a proper government was not symbolically driven in this fashion and, as much as it pains me to say it, I would ultimately wish to see public buildings with no flags, heraldry or insignia. Despite the aesthetics, it is inappropriate." - Now that I could agree with. If the proposal had been that no flag, heraldry or insignia should fly over public buildings, I personally would have found that proposal acceptable. But that is NOT what was proposed. What was proposed was that the Saltire should be removed and replaced by a modern concoction which is a dog's breakfast of the coats of arms of four different families. One of these four families is that of Sir Gilbert De Umfreville, an anglo-norman knight, the Baron of Prudhoe, who was appointed by King Edward the First of England (the one known as "the hammer of the Scots", the one who had William Wallace hung, drawn, and quartered) as earl of Angus. A case could be made out that an "Angus" flag should fly over Angus county buildings. But there is no reasonable case for flying the insignia of Gilbert De Umfreville, Baron of Prudhoe. If these councilors genuinely wanted a flag to represent Angus, they should have come up with something more appropriate than this.

"Where I imagine we diverge is that I believe in an acceptable interim compromise" - what compromise? It might conceivably be an "acceptable interim compromise" to come up with some way of recognising BOTH a particular "Angus" identity AND the particular connections of Angus with the Scottish flag. But no such compromise has in fact been proposed. On their official documents, Angus County Council has an official insignia. A flag composed of that official insignia might be a bit uninspired, but at least it wouldn't be offensive. In my view, the proposed so-called "Angus" flag is nothing of the sort. There is no way any "compromise" could allow the insignia of the Baron of Prudhoe to fly over us.

"In absence of sterility, inclusivity is better than exclusivity" - but the one-vote-majority group on Angus County Council have clearly failed to achieve inclusivity. They have, in fact, caused division. Even within their own ranks. Although council leader Bob Myles of Brechin has defended the decision to remove the Saltire, the two "independent" councillors from Montrose have been notable by their total silence since this thing blew up in their faces, even ignoring specific requests to explain their position from the "Montrose Review". As for the two Labour Party councillors who voted for that decision, again, complete silence. "Inclusivity"? They have even failed to include members of their own "alliance".

"Either way, I think the SNP have rather shown themselves for what they are once more - nationalists" - well of course the SNP are nationalists! However, a lot of the folk who have objected to the decision to remove the Saltire are not. Including myself.

agentmancuso

Aventinian

[quote="Dave Coull"]"Either way, I agree with him to some extent. I'd rather a proper government was not symbolically driven in this fashion and, as much as it pains me to say it, I would ultimately wish to see public buildings with no flags, heraldry or insignia. Despite the aesthetics, it is inappropriate."

Now that I could agree with. If the proposal had been that no flag, heraldry or insignia should fly over public buildings, I personally would have found that proposal acceptable. But that is NOT what was proposed.

Dave Coull

A very large percentage of the population of the county of Angus (possibly a majority, although the authorities have not seen fit to test opinion on this) are opposed to removal of the Scottish flags which have flown over the county for longer than the lifetimes of our younger voters, to be replaced with an alleged "Angus" flag which is in fact a modern concoction. Agentmancuso accused this large percentage of the population of being "cranks". While I personally don't care too much if folk consider me a "crank" - after all, I would be in the company of some of the greatest figures of intellectual, scientific, and political history in being so regarded - I failed to see how such a large percentage of the population can be "cranks".

Aventinian then made a completely irrelevant remark about glass houses and stones. If A accuses B of being a C--t, and there is widespread agreement that A is himself a bit of a C--t, then the saying about people in glass houses not throwing stones might appear relevant. But it has no relevance to this discussion, since my point was precisely that both Agentmancuso and myself would probably be considered "cranks" by some.

Agentmancuso now writes ".....ramble ramble ramble.....But all of this is largely irrelevant.....ramble ramble ramble....."

Aventinian now says "you quoted out of context".

I agree, Agentmancuso did indeed quote out of context.

No doubt when Martin Luther nailed his Ninety Five Theses to a church door, the Pope sought to dismiss this as "ramble ramble ramble". Those who are unable to provide a detailed response to well argued points often do.

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "I'm fairly sure you are a nationalist".

I have never claimed to be a nationalist, and I have objected when others used this term about me. Note that, when I post here on Our Scotland, there is no picture, no symbol, and certainly no flag, accompanying my name. Furthermore, although the moderators at one point decided to put "Nationalist" under my name, I strongly objected to that. I don't really like having ANY labels hung on me, but, after considerable discussion, the moderators came up with the somewhat less objectionable "independentista".

"perhaps making the mistake of assuming it is of the same vintage as the last grant of arms to the council?" - I made no such mistake. I don't give a damn about the last grant of arms to the council. This "Angus flag" is a modern invention because, as a flag, it only appeared in the last couple of months. No such flag ever existed before that. If they wanted an Angus flag, there are better ways to go about it than, without consultation, without considering any possible alternatives, suddenly springing this on an unsuspecting population, when no mention of their intention to do so was made in their election manifestoes a few months ago.

"if you want to be inclusive - fly the satire, Union Jack and the Angus flag. In fact, stick the UN flag up there too. Otherwise, be sensible and fly one with no emotive baggage" - this so-called "Angus flag" clearly DOES carry a lot of emotional baggage.

"I doubt the Baron of Prudhoe - if it is indeed his flag, which is very much in doubt - was any worse than any other Earl of Angus" - perhaps not. I took him as an example. But I am opposed to flying any of the symbols of feudal aristocracy. If they want an Angus flag, then let them have a competition to design one, and let them put the results of that competion out for consultation, instead of telling us "here it is, whether you like it or not".

Aventinian

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "Regardless of whether your views are awful or sensible, you're no Martin Luther" - irrelevant, since I never claimed I was. The point is, for me, being dismissed as a "crank" is no big thing, since some of the great figures of history have been dismissed as "cranks". For this reason, your reference to glass houses and stones was also irrelevant.

I wrote "a very large percentage of the population of Angus" and Aventinian says "So?"

So it is not possible for a very large percentage of the population to be "cranks". They can be wrong, but they can't be "cranks". For instance, when the vast majority of the population believed that the world was flat, it was those who said no, the world is not flat, who were cranks. They were right, but they were cranks.

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "You clearly didn't read or understand this: 'I think he in fact accused people who care altogether too much about some stupid blue and white rag to be "cranks" rather than anyone who may in fact approve or disapprove here.' "

I did both read and understand it, but that was in fact a later spin on what was originally suggested, as well as a later amendment on your part. The original implication was that anybody who cared about this at all was a "crank". And it is a fact that in this region a large percentage of the population, probably a majority, do care. My point was that the majority can be wrong (and frequently are) but the majority cannot be cranks. All "cranks" are, by definition, a small minority in _their_ time and place.

"the vast, vast, vast majority of cranks have most certainly found themselves, well, dead and forgotten" - of course. That is so obvious it should go without saying. Nevertheless, it remains a fact that this does not apply to _all_ who are dismissed as "cranks", and some of the greatest figures in science, history, etc have been so dismissed. That also ought to be obvious, but apparently wasn't, therefore I had to point this out.

"I don't care if you are a crank or not" - neither do I.

agentmancuso

Dave Coull

Agentmancuso wrote "Preferring one flag to another doesn't make you a crank. Thinking that flags matter much does make you a crank" - hhmmm. It's true I have a saltire flying over my garage. But I only put it there to annoy my next door neighbour. He was a total pain and so was his wife and they were both very devoted to the union jack, you see. That particular neighbour has since moved away, I'm delighted to say, and far more friendly neighbours have moved in next door. But I didn't bother to take the flag down. By this time it had attracted the attention of other folk besides the immediate neighbours, so I left it there, not so much as a flag of Scotland, as an assertion of my own presence. Of course I will take it down when Scotland becomes independent. Because then it might be seen as a sign of support for the government. And I wouldn't want that. Does that make me a crank? Frankly, I don't give a damn whether it does or not.

Aventinian

So, in other words, you mainly see flags as a way of alienating people?

No wonder you prefer the politicised one flying instead of a neutral one...

Dave Coull

I wrote "It's true I have a saltire flying over my garage. But I only put it there to annoy my next door neighbour. He was a total pain and so was his wife and they were both very devoted to the union jack, you see. That particular neighbour has since moved away, I'm delighted to say, and far more friendly neighbours have moved in next door".

Aventinian responds "you mainly see flags as a way of alienating people?"

Ah, now, be fair, that particular neighbour was the one who put up a flag as a way of alienating people, not me. It was only AFTER he had done so that I put up my flag. The fact that he raised his flag on the very day that the previous Pope died may have been pure coincidence, or he may (mistakenly) have thought that I was Catholic, and that by doing so he could annoy me. He didn't actually know much about me, because he never bothered to find out. For months I would say a polite "good morning" to him every day, and he would respond with frozen silence. I made many attempts to try to discover what his problem was and to try to discuss any grievances he had, but my attempts were always rejected. I did ask another neighbour, an elderly military gentleman who was, as it happens, the local organiser of "Save The Black Watch", what the guy's problem was, and got the reply "he's a complete arsehole, that's his problem". In the end, he and his wife split up, and went their separate ways, then she moved out because he wasn't paying maintenance for his unfortunate kids, and she couldn't pay the rent. He knew the folk who moved in after he left, and he had tried to poison them against me. But as my very good neighbour (now) says "I take folk as I find them. And I found Dave easy to get along with".

carol

Dave I can't see your logic to why you would bring the saltire down once we get independence

Dave Coull

Carol wrote "Dave I can't see your logic to why you would bring the saltire down once we get independence".

I have a saltire flying on my garage. No, it's not a hen coop, and never was, that's just one of literally dozens of things that the News Of The World managed to get wrong! I put that flag up for a specific reason, and I will take it down for a specific reason. That's my personal choice. I'm not trying to make anybody else follow my example.

My reason is that, at present, it can act as a sign of support for independence. Nobody could possibly think that it is a sign of support for the British government. However, once we actually have independence, it is quite possible that some folk might (wrongly) take it as a sign of support for the Scottish government. And, like I said, I wouldn't want that. So it will come down. Like I said, just the flag at my place, I'm not trying to make anybody else follow my example.

carol

I was thinking of flying a saltire from my double storey rabbit hutch Razz

I see no logic behind your reasoning moreso confusing when I read your opening post to this thread

Dave Coull

Carol wrote "I see no logic behind your reasoning moreso confusing when I read your opening post to this thread".

But the opening post in this thread was about what the (one vote) majority group on Angus Council suddenly decided to do, despite there being nothing in their election manifestoes to that effect. They decided to take down the saltire, and to raise instead a flag which includes the arms of Baron Prudhoe, Sir Gilbert de Umfreville, who suppressed Angus on behalf of Edward the First of England (Hammer of the Scots). That was a truly crazy decision, myself and others continue to resist that decision, I think for some of those councillors the implications of their decision are only starting to sink in now, and there are indications that the one vote majority on this is melting away.

On the other hand, if I decide after independence that I will take the saltire off my own place, because it could be seen as a sign of support for some government, I will not be raising a flag which includes the arms of Baron Prudhoe, Sir Gilbert de Umfreville, who suppressed Angus on behalf of Edward the First of England. In fact I probably won't raise any flag at all. I may just live a quiet life without any public assertion of identity. That is entirely my own business. There is no contradiction in this at all.

carol

the saltire's part of our identity, not a political flag and I cannot fathom out how or why it would be seen as a government flag after independence

Aventinian

agentmancuso

carol

our national flag identified worldwide, doesn't represent independence, any government, political party etc

Carol

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "I notice you didn't actually address the point I made which demonstrates that Angus Council totally disagrees with your interpretation of history there".

Okay. I'll address it.

The majority of the councillors have only a very vague notion of who these coats-of-arms on the so-called "Angus flag" are supposed to represent. They didn't really anticipate that their lack of knowledge on such matters would turn out to be a handicap.

It is not true that "Angus Council" totally disagree with my interpretation of history there. What is true is that a minority of the councillors disagree with my interpretation there. This minority of councillors managed, on one occasion, to induce a few other councillors into voting with them on this issue, not because they "disagreed with my interpretation of history there", but simply because this was a condition of having an alliance which could take over the running of the council at all.

That minority of councillors who disagree with my interpretation of history there got lucky on one occasion. They managed to squeek their plan through with a majority of one. It remains to be seen whether they will be able to repeat that stroke of luck. I have reason to believe that several of the councillors who voted their way last time are considering their options.

Dave Coull

Carol, I don't see why it matters so much to you whether I fly a flag after independence or not. The vast majority of people in this country do not fly flags from their houses, garages or double-storey-rabbit-hutches. The vast majority of the people who signed the petition to keep the Saltire flying from public buildings in Angus do not fly flags from their own houses. Whether I do or not is a matter entirely up to me. So why should it matter so much to you whether I do, or not?

carol

it doesn't matter Dave just curious to why you won't fly it after independence

so why may it be perceived as being a government flag following independence?

Carol

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Carol asked "why may it be perceived as being a government flag following independence?"

Well, it might not seem like that to most people. But to some. Including me. At present, Scotland, along with Catalonia etc, is officially regarded by various European and international bodies as a "stateless nation". Mind you, with the SNP in power, it gets less and less "stateless" every day! (Taking international initiatives over nuclear weapons, seeking to "repatriate" control of elections, etc etc etc.) But still, technically, "a stateless nation". But as soon as we are officially independent, there can no longer be any pretence of being "stateless". The nascent Scottish state which is already flexing its muscles will be well and truly a reality. At present I fly the Saltire to emphasise independence from the British state. But then, FOR ME , it will be necessary to take the saltire down, in order to emphasise that no government, no state, owns me. This is my own personal decision, and I am not suggesting that anybody should follow my example.

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "for Christ's sake"

When I was a young laddie, if there was one thing that my mother liked even less than she liked foul language, it was blasphemy. It was drummed into me that those who resorted to such language did so because they were unable to express themselves properly. I still think that is true.

"don't be a sore loser" - I haven't lost anything. The SNP (a party which doesn't include me) members of Angus Council, plus the only genuine Independent on the Council, lost that decision by one vote. It only became a matter known to the general public (including myself) after that. As John Paul Jones said at the Battle of Flamborough Head, "Lose? I haven't even begun to fight yet".

"Pretending a minority agree with what a majority have voted for" - it was a one-vote majority, and I have reason to believe that one vote has disappeared.

agentmancuso

Aventinian

So in order words, you can't answer the historical question.

agentmancuso

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "you can't answer the historical question".

What historical question?

You wrote a lot of highly subjective political stuff, but I wasn't aware you had asked any historical question.

carol

agentmancuso

Aventinian

carol

Dave Coull

Simple lesson in English grammar: a question is something that ends with a question mark.

Aventinian wrote "you can't answer the historical question".

To which I responded "What historical question?"

(Note that, although I was unaware of any alleged historical "question" from Aventinian, my response to Aventinian was indeed phrased as a question.)

Aventinian now quotes at length from a statement which he made in an earlier post. I have studied what he re-posted, and I still don't see any question mark. Like I said before, "You wrote a lot of highly subjective political stuff, but I wasn't aware you had asked any historical question".

Aventinian now says "I pointed out that Angus Council's report on the matter differed wildly from your, erm, interpretation of history" - okay, so maybe it does.

"and asked that you answer why it is so" - statement of fact: no, you didn't ask me why. You maybe intended to, you maybe thought you had, but you didn't.

"considering that Angus Council is a rather more reliable source of fact than you" - statement of fact: that is a matter of opinion.

So far, all we have regarding what "Angus Council" is alleged to have said is your interpretation of this. If you want the discussion to go any further, then you are going to have to provide either a link to the actual document to which you are referring, or a proper academic reference for it.

Having said that, of course there is more than one possible interpretation of the various coats of arms on the so-called "Angus" flag, but one of them certainly is associated with Gilbert de Umfreville, Baron of Prudhoe, in Northumberland, who married Matilda, countess of Angus, and thus gained a plausible claim to the title of "Earl" for himself. The son of Gilbert and Matilda, also called Gilbert de Umfreville (1246-1308) , was raised by Simon De Montfort, Earl of Leicester, and, although he succeeded to the title of Earl of Angus, he spent most of his life in England. He founded a chantry at Prudhoe castle in Northumberland for two priests to celebrate mass daily. The connection of this lot with Angus is at best slight, and at worst positively harmful to the people of Angus, and I see no reason why we should celebrate them.

More generally, I see no particular reason why we should celebrate any of the thugs, con-men, and protection-racketeers who lorded it over the people of Angus. Flying the arms of Gilbert de Umfreville may be particularly offensive, but I see no reason why, in 2007, we should accept that any of their symbols should fly over the folk of Angus.

I mentioned earlier that, if there is a real demand for an Angus flag, then there could be some sort of competition to design one, and some sort of consultation process by which the people of Angus can express a view on the various entries for this competition. Aventinian didn't like that idea. Perhaps because, since he isn't a resident of Angus, he would have no say in the process. But it might produce something good. And if it didn't, well, at least it wouldn't produce something positively offensive.

agentmancuso

carol

cheers i wasn't sure if you were heading in the nit-picking direction, too much time is wasted on it and energies could be better used elsewhere Wink

regards

Carol

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "You're being pointlessly evasive" - no I'm not. It is entirely up to me, and nobody else, which parts of a message from you, or from anybody else, I choose to comment on, and which parts I choose to ignore. That is not "being evasive". It is me setting my priorities, not yours.

However, for the record, for your future reference, if you have a question you want to ask me, then phrase it clearly as a question, and, whether you consider this to be grammatically essential or not, just because you know that I do, put a question mark at the end of it. I will answer a direct question. I may choose to ignore what I consider you just waffling on.

"This Scottish saltire you're so proud of" - the main person celebrated on the Saint Andrews Cross is of course Saint Andrew. He was one of Jesus's twelve apostles. Far from being a big shot aristocratic landowner or politician, he was persecuted and crucified. On a diagonal cross.

"was of course the banner of a King" - true. But that was a very long time ago and nowadays it has become a flag of the common people. So far as I know none of the big landowners of Angus today claim descent from that king. Whereas some of the characters celebrated on that so-called "Angus" flag have living descendants who are insufferable enough without giving them any extra reason for thinking they are better than the rest of us.

"Have you removed the reference to Edward I" - the de Umfrevilles were confirmed as overlords of Angus by King Edward the First of England. The De Umfrevilles were on the side of the English king against both Wallace and Bruce. According to the link which you yourself sent, the top right quarter of the so-called "Angus" flag is the arms of the De Umfrevilles. That is offensive.

"Offensive to one person" - no. I wasn't even aware of this until it was pointed out to me by other people for whom it is offensive.

"You'd probably have had a better case being offended by the symbols that refer to Robert the Bruce in the flag" - I'm not quite sure why you say that, but it's true Bruce was an opportunist of whom many in Scotland were suspicious at the time, and the "Community of the Realm" did spell out in the Declaration of Arbroath that they reserved the right to depose him if he let them down. Let me make it quite clear, I object to all of the symbols of feudal overlordship on that so-called "Angus" flag.

If there is a real demand for an Angus flag, then there could be some sort of competition to design one, and some sort of consultation process by which the people of Angus can express a view on the "candidates". You never know, this might produce something good. And if it doesn't, well, at least it wouldn't produce something positively offensive.

Dave Coull

One of the Angus councillors I wrote to about this matter, a senior official of the "Angus Alliance" which took over in May with a one-vote majority, has written me a lengthy reply. He says "I really enjoyed reading your letter and respect your arguments on the inappropriatenes of aspects of the flag historically. However, one has often to compromise in order to preserve unity and if that means watering down one's principles, then that is the reality we have to learn to live with in coalition politics".

Regarding taking down the Saltire, he says "that was never our intention. Instead, we take the view that the Saltires should remain and over a period of time the Angus flag could, eventually, fly alongside the Saltire. There is, of course, a cost to be met in doing this, and I think personally that the money to provide the additional costs involved should be met by the Alliance councillors out of their own pockets".

So, he is saying that he would be willing to help to meet the cost of this out of his own pocket, as long as his colleagues in the Labour/Tory/LibDem/"Independent" Alliance do likewise. I wonder how they will react to a senior member of their own alliance proposing this???!!!!

Although this councillor is saying that taking down the Saltire "was never our intention", the Council leader, Bob Myles, did indeed originally state that the intention was to "replace" the Saltire with this so-called "Angus flag". So it sounds to me like there has indeed been a shift of position there. Or perhaps it was Bob Myles's intention to "replace" the Saltire, but some of his colleagues never intended this?

Okay, I still don't like the idea of having a flag consisting of the coats-of-arms of a quartet of robber barons flying over us. But if it really is the case that the Saltires are not going to come down, and if the councillors really do have to pay for any new flags and flagpoles out of their own pockets, I would count that as a success.

However, until such time as we get a definite statement from the Council as such on this, there is every reason to keep the pressure on.

Aventinian

And to think some people say the saltire isn't becoming a political banner...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7069832.stm

You couldn't make this s**t up.

carol

our nation's flag is not political Confused

why not promote the saltire and St Andrew via the educational route? when it comes to Scottish History, schools are still dragging their heels. It's good see Scotland being put first for a change, instead of having Britishness rammed down our throats

a few examples (funnily enough leading up to elections)

http://www.theirpast-yourfuture.org.uk/ a national project rolled out through schools and local communities. I remember being at a local steering group and another person complaining why all this money 60 years on, it would've made sense to have 50th celebrations not 60th Confused

Celebrating the Battle of Trafalgar in Scotland Confused

Edinburgh Tatoo http://www.edinburgh-tattoo.co.uk/news/pressrelease43.html

and planting trees http://www.treeforall.org.uk/Scot...2005news/Trafalgar+Remembered.htm

It's about time Scotland's heritage was put first

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Carol wrote "our nation's flag is not political".

ALL national flags are political. They symbolise a particular polity. Many national flags make what are clearly political statements. The Union Jack, for instance, consists of the crosses associated with Saint George, Saint Patrick, and Saint Andrew, with the cross of England super-imposed on the other two. Clearly a political statement. The "stars and stripes" of the USA makes several political statements. First of all, it follows the Union Jack in being red, white, and blue, these being "patriotic" colours in the USA long before there was such a thing as the USA. Secondly, the number of stripes symbolises the number of the founding member states (thirteen). Thirdly, the number of stars symbolises the number of present-day states. The number of stars can change, the number of stripes always remains the same. To begin with, of course, there were just thirteen stars. These symbolised the fact that these squabbling colonies, some of which had actually went to war with each other in the not-too-distant-past, were now UNITED. You can't get much more political than that. The flag of Saudi Arabia has written on it "There is no God but God and Mohamed is His Prophet". A statement of religious belief, certainly, but also a statement of political intention, about how society should be run. Many other flags also make clearly political statements. But even the ones that don't make statements are political. You can see this at borders, where you get two different flags flying within a short distance of each other. The flags say "here, OUR polity begins". A statement of political possession.

I disagree with Aventinian that Scottish History is well enough taught. I agree with Carol that we should have more and better teaching of Scottish History in our schools. Where I would quite probably disagree with Carol is about what would be "better" teaching of Scottish History. Aventinian is right that Carol is a nationalist, and sees history from a nationalist perspective. (Of course, Aventinian is a nationalist too, a British one.) Now, of course, all history books are written from somebody's perspective, there is no such thing as totally unbiased history. But whether it's the schools of the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin teaching children about "The Great Patriotic War", or the schools of the USA teaching a ridiculously American Nationalist version of history, I am not too keen on state-sponsored nationalistic history of any kind.

Aventinian

carol

Dave unfortunately I was brought up under British rule (an army brat), waved UJ's at the Queen, stood up to the anthem Shocked

celebrated her birthdays Rolling Eyes

Av the 'Their Past, Your Future' project would've been flying UJ's in community halls, schools, museums, in the streets etc all over Scotland, targetting all, including schoolkids, looking at the site i think they're still rolling out the millions of pounds on the project. I think their boats were scuppered in my local area most events were poorly attended.

Carol

agentmancuso

carol

Aventinian