Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
 

See your forums statistics

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Campaigns/Events...
dnsp

We Need you

nay
Holebender

Don't you think DNSP sounds unfortunately like NSDAP?

In case you're not aware, NSDAP were the initials of a German political party whose name translated into English as National Socialist German Workers Party, which was usually shortened to NAZI. If it comes to that, don't you think National Society Party is uncomfortably close to National Socialist Party?

Where does the DNSP stand on self determination and independence for Scotland?
Cado

Yup.

Reads like the New Labour manifesto.
dnsp

Holebender wrote:
Don't you think DNSP sounds unfortunately like NSDAP?

In case you're not aware, NSDAP were the initials of a German political party whose name translated into English as National Socialist German Workers Party, which was usually shortened to NAZI. If it comes to that, don't you think National Society Party is uncomfortably close to National Socialist Party?

I dont think its so close and the thing is we are not nothing like them and yes i was aware of what that party was. Whats important is what the words stand for and we are not socialist or racist or anything like the Nazi party.

Where does the DNSP stand on self determination and independence for Scotland?


The same as the rest of Britian this is one nation, for us Scotland would not be able to break away the same for Wales and England we are one and together we could be a great nation again.
dnsp

Cado wrote:
Yup.

Reads like the New Labour manifesto.


We are not like Labour i think you should look again, please dont put us in the same bed as Labour old or new lol.
Holebender

Then why don't you bugger off and find a British Nationalist website?

I'm sure many ex-Labour people like Sir Oswald Mosley and Robert Kilroy-Silk would feel right at home in your party.
dnsp

We are not Fascists if you are thinking of the British Union of Fascists party with your comment to Mosley, we just think Britain is better united not separate nations if we took office there would be officials of all the nations that make Great Britain with the sole purpose of making this kingdom better for us all. Scotland is part of Britain and we are not a English party we are a party for everybody which includes Scotland if there is one thing in life that is you cant please all the people all the time thanks for your opinion on the matter.
Cado

Got a couple of questions for you DNSP.

1) How have you arrived at your policies?
2) Are they policies which you feel are in common with any other political body, as in - you're from the same sphere of outlook, though a different vehicle for those views - or do you feel they are unique to your party?
2) Are they policies you have a deep, personal beleif in?
3) Are they policies that you have opted for because you believe they have potentially 'sellability' - and therefore are you just being an opportunist, a salesman if you will?
4) How would you deal with a difference of opinion where no agreement was possible? As in - the only arrived at settlement is "we'll need to agree to disagree".
5) How would you deal with a difference of opinion (where no agreement was possible) with another group - who held the differing opinion - (irrespective of the size or significance of that organisation)
6) Which do you feel is more important? The rights of the individual or the rights of the State. If you believe they are equal - how would you deal with differing opinions that existed in society, where no agreement was attainable - irrespective of the relative sizes of those organisations/groupings etc.
7) A random hypothetical question - they help take away the boredom of dry questions.
Galileo Galilei proposed that it was the Earth that revolved around the Sun. This was in complete contradiction to the teachings of the Vatican, which beleived that it was the Sun the revolved around the Earth. This disagreement has reached an international court. You have the casting vote. Who would you side with? Galileo or the Vatican?
Holebender

That's seven. A couple is two.


I have only one question; how many members does this party have?
Aventinian

Holebender wrote:
Then why don't you bugger off and find a British Nationalist website?


Surely you should be coming out in Solidarity with one of your fellow ideologues... or, shock and horror, could it be that Nationalism is inherently inconsistent and simply based on an individual's prejudices?

Quote:
I'm sure many ex-Labour people like Sir Oswald Mosley and Robert Kilroy-Silk would feel right at home in your party.


Oswald Mosley was a European Nationalist.
Aventinian

Holebender wrote:
Don't you think DNSP sounds unfortunately like NSDAP?

In case you're not aware, NSDAP were the initials of a German political party whose name translated into English as National Socialist German Workers Party, which was usually shortened to NAZI. If it comes to that, don't you think National Society Party is uncomfortably close to National Socialist Party?


Ah, perhaps the speediest proof of Godwin's Law ever offered in the history of the internet.
Holebender

Not so. I was asking the original poster if he didn't think the name of this party of his sounded uncomfortably close to the name of another party. I didn't accuse anyone of anything.

Mind you, it gets worse when you visit the dnsp website and see all the references to "social nationism". Maybe it's all a spoof?
The Lithgae Jambo

Holebender wrote:
That's seven. A couple is two.



Aye, but he's just entering into the spirit of things:

dnsp wrote:
This will be a group that is both socially right wing.


That's one. Both is two.

Wink
Aventinian

Holebender wrote:
Not so. I was asking the original poster if he didn't think the name of this party of his sounded uncomfortably close to the name of another party. I didn't accuse anyone of anything.

Mind you, it gets worse when you visit the dnsp website and see all the references to "social nationism". Maybe it's all a spoof?


I have to agree, that spoof thought did cross my mind.

But yes, I suppose you didn't accuse him of anything. But all the same, suggesting any sort of proximity to the Nazis as uncomfortable seems a bit extreme to me.
Holebender

Extreme in what way? Extremely mild maybe?
Cado

Quote:
I have to agree, that spoof thought did cross my mind.


Don't think he's a Nazi.

Think he's a doped up hippy fishing for nazis.

Its his pigeon inglis....
macnumpty

dnsp wrote:
The same as the rest of Britian [sic] this is one nation, for us Scotland would not be able to break away the same for Wales and England we are one and together we could be a great nation again.


dnsp wrote:
if we took office there would be officials of all the nations that make Great Britain with the sole purpose of making this kingdom better for us all.


So is Britain one nation, or are there many nations in Britain? And if the answer is both, that there can be many nations within a wider nation state, then why are you "opposed to plans to turn the EU into a centralised superstate with inappropriate economic policies being imposed upon its constituent regions by the EuroCentral bank." What's good for the goose is, after all, good for the gander.

Further, on the one hand you want to:

"Emphasise real multi-ethnic, multiculturalism in all areas and eradicate sexism"
"Respect the free exercise of religion"
"Defend the self-evident truth, 'that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' "
have "Real Liberty and Justice for all the races and cultures of the Nation"
and say that "Steps must be taken to promote the Welsh, Gaelic and Cornish languages"

but you also want to:

"Defend the traditional family unit based on one man and one woman" - isn't that inherently sexist, and going against the notion that "all men are created equal"? (and isn't that statement sexist as well?
"Recognise the Judeo-Christian heritage of our shared values" - what if you don't come from a Judeo-Christian background? Are you still free to exercise your religion? Doesn't promoting Judeo-Christian morality work against multiculturalism?
"Protect our language as our common language " - doesn't that cancel out any promotion of Gaelic, Welsh and Cornish?
And don't all of those policies undermine your pledge for "Real Liberty and Justice for all races and cultures?"

It's not taken very long for these inconsitencies to develop. I'd wish you luck - you certainly need it - but I intend to save my luck for something far less futile.
Cado

Quote:
'that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' "


Well seeing as we are all of women born your last part regarding 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' is definitely f***ed before kickoff.

Quote:
"Defend the traditional family unit based on one man and one woman"


If was ignorant and I bought a dictionary - and I confused woman as referring to the plural (is there such a thing as singular? they always go to the toilets in pairs at least...) - anyway - so I married more than one bird out of not being able to understand a dictionary well - I'm dyslexic and they're both stupid - whats you're comment on that situation.?

Quote:
"Steps must be taken to promote the Welsh, Gaelic and Cornish languages"


Would you also include native food dishes in this? ie the traditional Gaelic dish of Seileach?
Aventinian

macnumpty wrote:
So is Britain one nation, or are there many nations in Britain? And if the answer is both, that there can be many nations within a wider nation state, then why are you "opposed to plans to turn the EU into a centralised superstate with inappropriate economic policies being imposed upon its constituent regions by the EuroCentral bank." What's good for the goose is, after all, good for the gander.


Perhaps there is a British nation, a Scottish (or English, Welsh, NIish) nation - but no European nation.

As I've said, it all seems to simply hinge on the particular emotions of the Nationalist concerned.

Cado wrote:
the traditional Gaelic dish of Seileach?


What's that then?
agentmancuso

Aventinian wrote:
Cado wrote:
the traditional Gaelic dish of Seileach?


What's that then?


I thought 'seileach' meant willow, as in the first part of Sauchiehall St?

Don't tell me the natives are still eating trees?
Cado

I'm surprised you haven't heard of it - though Google ain't good at picking up on the oddities.

Its a very rare Highlands dish, made from a very rare breed of pedigree sheep, well - only a small bit of each sheep.

I just thought that it may count as one of those speciality traditional dishes the EU seem to be so fond of protecting from those who'd nick their 'trade names'.

A bit like Champagne etc.
dnsp

Cado wrote:
Got a couple of questions for you DNSP.

1) How have you arrived at your policies?
2) Are they policies which you feel are in common with any other political body, as in - you're from the same sphere of outlook, though a different vehicle for those views - or do you feel they are unique to your party?
2) Are they policies you have a deep, personal beleif in?
3) Are they policies that you have opted for because you believe they have potentially 'sellability' - and therefore are you just being an opportunist, a salesman if you will?
4) How would you deal with a difference of opinion where no agreement was possible? As in - the only arrived at settlement is "we'll need to agree to disagree".
5) How would you deal with a difference of opinion (where no agreement was possible) with another group - who held the differing opinion - (irrespective of the size or significance of that organisation)
6) Which do you feel is more important? The rights of the individual or the rights of the State. If you believe they are equal - how would you deal with differing opinions that existed in society, where no agreement was attainable - irrespective of the relative sizes of those organisations/groupings etc.
7) A random hypothetical question - they help take away the boredom of dry questions.
Galileo Galilei proposed that it was the Earth that revolved around the Sun. This was in complete contradiction to the teachings of the Vatican, which beleived that it was the Sun the revolved around the Earth. This disagreement has reached an international court. You have the casting vote. Who would you side with? Galileo or the Vatican?


Got a couple of questions for you DNSP.

1) How have you arrived at your policies?
Some of the policies are from other parties I agreed with on some points but not the others. While others are from my own mind.

2) Are they policies which you feel are in common with any other political body, as in - you're from the same sphere of outlook, though a different vehicle for those views - or do you feel they are unique to your party?
Well of course there from other political spheres I don’t think no party is having nothing in common with another, but I think our outlook and philosophy is unique to us.

2) Are they policies you have a deep, personal belief in?
Yes they are, to me.

3) Are they policies that you have opted for because you believe they have potentially 'sell ability' - and therefore are you just being an opportunist, a salesman if you will?
No I don’t why would I do that, I created my party because I wanted something better than the option we have now I am a British nationalist and I wanted a party to represent that without being racist to any 1 group in anyway.

4) How would you deal with a difference of opinion where no agreement was possible? As in - the only arrived at settlement is "we'll need to agree to disagree".
Like any other party does sometimes things cannot be agreed, in that case we will work to work out a solution or a compromise.

5) How would you deal with a difference of opinion (where no agreement was possible) with another group - who held the differing opinion - (irrespective of the size or significance of that organisation)
The same as above in most cases we would do our best to use common sense and understanding to reach a goal we would both be happy with.

6) Which do you feel is more important? The rights of the individual or the rights of the State. If you believe they are equal - how would you deal with differing opinions that existed in society, where no agreement was attainable - irrespective of the relative sizes of those organisations/groupings etc.
The Common Good of the Citizens of the Nation before that of Self Interest, for all Citizens of the Nation without regards for ethnic origin or religious beliefs, secondly people can have other opinions but in the democracy we live in there are winners and losers so when there has been a referendum or voting on a issue and the vote is in that will be the decision of the people. A question to you because of your line of questioning do you think we are some sort of Fascist party?


7) A random hypothetical question - they help take away the boredom of dry questions.
Galileo Galilei proposed that it was the Earth that revolved around the Sun. This was in complete contradiction to the teachings of the Vatican, which believed that it was the Sun the revolved around the Earth. This disagreement has reached an international court. You have the casting vote. Who would you side with? Galileo or the Vatican?
In that day and age I have no idea what I would have thought had I been around back then what would you have thought?
dnsp

Holebender wrote:
That's seven. A couple is two.


I have only one question; how many members does this party have?


Right now we are small we have only 48 and just 1 person is Scotish so far
dnsp

Holebender wrote:
Not so. I was asking the original poster if he didn't think the name of this party of his sounded uncomfortably close to the name of another party. I didn't accuse anyone of anything.

Mind you, it gets worse when you visit the dnsp website and see all the references to "social nationism". Maybe it's all a spoof?


because it may remind you of something does not mean it is, and we are not even close to those monsters. Spoof if i wanted to be a Nazi i would be a Nazi but i am not and will never be, i will say its not the 1st time sombody has made a comment like you and the party members and i are considering a name change.
dnsp

Holebender wrote:
Extreme in what way? Extremely mild maybe?


Sorry what are you trying to say i am a Nazi ? if you think i am where do you get this hidden knowledge from? there is nothing in my site which is that of a Nazi or a Nazi party.
dnsp

Cado wrote:
Quote:
I have to agree, that spoof thought did cross my mind.


Don't think he's a Nazi.

Think he's a doped up hippy fishing for nazis.

Its his pigeon inglis....


Lol i guess you got me!!!
dnsp

macnumpty wrote:
dnsp wrote:
The same as the rest of Britian [sic] this is one nation, for us Scotland would not be able to break away the same for Wales and England we are one and together we could be a great nation again.


dnsp wrote:
if we took office there would be officials of all the nations that make Great Britain with the sole purpose of making this kingdom better for us all.


So is Britain one nation, or are there many nations in Britain? And if the answer is both, that there can be many nations within a wider nation state, then why are you "opposed to plans to turn the EU into a centralised superstate with inappropriate economic policies being imposed upon its constituent regions by the EuroCentral bank." What's good for the goose is, after all, good for the gander.

Further, on the one hand you want to:

"Emphasise real multi-ethnic, multiculturalism in all areas and eradicate sexism"
"Respect the free exercise of religion"
"Defend the self-evident truth, 'that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' "
have "Real Liberty and Justice for all the races and cultures of the Nation"
and say that "Steps must be taken to promote the Welsh, Gaelic and Cornish languages"

but you also want to:

"Defend the traditional family unit based on one man and one woman" - isn't that inherently sexist, and going against the notion that "all men are created equal"? (and isn't that statement sexist as well?
"Recognise the Judeo-Christian heritage of our shared values" - what if you don't come from a Judeo-Christian background? Are you still free to exercise your religion? Doesn't promoting Judeo-Christian morality work against multiculturalism?
"Protect our language as our common language " - doesn't that cancel out any promotion of Gaelic, Welsh and Cornish?
And don't all of those policies undermine your pledge for "Real Liberty and Justice for all races and cultures?"

It's not taken very long for these inconsitencies to develop. I'd wish you luck - you certainly need it - but I intend to save my luck for something far less futile.


I have learned one thing in life whatever you say or write there can be found fault in it by other person, what I wrote is how I see things to be I’m sorry if its not what is right to you. I don’t force anyone to agree with me but for me to say and do nothing makes me part of the problem all I can say is I tried in my own way to make the change to what I think would be for the better, unlike some others whose just sit and complain about how society is and the problems we face in day to day life.
macnumpty

But what you say is essentially a number of buzzwords strung together, ignoring any contradiction or inconsistency between them. Now, fair play for speaking up, but are you doing so because you feel you have something to say, or because you feel you have to say something?

And let me ask my questions again:

Isn't basing a family unit on one man and one woman fundamentally sexist and running counter to your wish for equality?
Does freedom to exercise religion only apply if that religion comes from the Judeo-Christian heritage you intend to promote, and how can you promote a Judeo-Christian morality and multiculutralism at the same time?
How can you protect English as a common language and promote Gaelic, Welsh, Cornish et al at the same time?
dnsp

macnumpty wrote:
But what you say is essentially a number of buzzwords strung together, ignoring any contradiction or inconsistency between them. Now, fair play for speaking up, but are you doing so because you feel you have something to say, or because you feel you have to say something?

And let me ask my questions again:

Isn't basing a family unit on one man and one woman fundamentally sexist and running counter to your wish for equality?
Does freedom to exercise religion only apply if that religion comes from the Judeo-Christian heritage you intend to promote, and how can you promote a Judeo-Christian morality and multiculutralism at the same time?
How can you protect English as a common language and promote Gaelic, Welsh, Cornish et al at the same time?


This is also in our Platform

9. in the traditional family unit which is a female mother, male father & child or children. We promote the family unit as a key basis for a well-ordered and stable society, whilst allowing those who prefer to live Alternative lifestyles to pursue them if they wish.

In regards to Judeo-Christianity that’s our heritage and what I am saying is we would never take that away and that would remain the state religion but on the other hand all people have the freedom to practice there religion freely in this nation.

The said languages are of these isles but they are languages which are on the decline, we would if those people wish in the areas of the country or any school in the British isles would like to maintain there language we would do all we could in assisting and learning and preserving the languages. Maybe even make it compulsory in those areas to have lessons in those languages in schools if that is what the people want. I really don’t see a problem with what we are offering.
dnsp

macnumpty wrote:
But what you say is essentially a number of buzzwords strung together, ignoring any contradiction or inconsistency between them. Now, fair play for speaking up, but are you doing so because you feel you have something to say, or because you feel you have to say something?

And let me ask my questions again:

Isn't basing a family unit on one man and one woman fundamentally sexist and running counter to your wish for equality?
Does freedom to exercise religion only apply if that religion comes from the Judeo-Christian heritage you intend to promote, and how can you promote a Judeo-Christian morality and multiculutralism at the same time?
How can you protect English as a common language and promote Gaelic, Welsh, Cornish et al at the same time?


Sorry i forgot to mention in our site in the (in short) this is also stated most of your question can be answered if you take your time reading our site.

The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. And is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within on the basis of the principle: The Common Good of the Citizens of the Nation before that of ones Self Interest.
Holebender

dnsp wrote:
Holebender wrote:
Extreme in what way? Extremely mild maybe?


Sorry what are you trying to say i am a Nazi ? if you think i am where do you get this hidden knowledge from? there is nothing in my site which is that of a Nazi or a Nazi party.


I am not and have not said you're a Nazi. I said the name of your party is uncomfortably close to the name of the Nazi party. Another poster said it was extreme to say closeness to Nazis is uncomfortable and I responded as you have quoted above. I hope that clears things up for you.

I notice an awful lot of "I"s in your post about the genesis of your party and must surmise that it is all your own little vanity project. Organised religion is (thank goodness) dead or dying throughout Europe and if you're hitching your wagon to that dead horse you will go the way of your churches.
dnsp

Holebender wrote:
dnsp wrote:
Holebender wrote:
Extreme in what way? Extremely mild maybe?


Sorry what are you trying to say i am a Nazi ? if you think i am where do you get this hidden knowledge from? there is nothing in my site which is that of a Nazi or a Nazi party.


I am not and have not said you're a Nazi. I said the name of your party is uncomfortably close to the name of the Nazi party. Another poster said it was extreme to say closeness to Nazis is uncomfortable and I responded as you have quoted above. I hope that clears things up for you.

I notice an awful lot of "I"s in your post about the genesis of your party and must surmise that it is all your own little vanity project. Organised religion is (thank goodness) dead or dying throughout Europe and if you're hitching your wagon to that dead horse you will go the way of your churches.


Is not all politics someone’s vanity project? My party is what I think is right, like the labour party thinks there policies are right for me and you. I am not hitching my party to no religious wagon but in this world people have religion and it means more or less to the individual so there must be polices about religion and how it works in society for example I think American politics has far to much religious doctrine in there policies and they impose it on there citizens whatever there religion might be, I know I quote this all the time but you cant please all the people all the time. I am just a man who has come up with my party and its structure, but I am well aware of my own policies and beliefs and merit I really don’t want to be the leader of my party because I don’t have the merit to do that, I believe in my own ideology. So there for of our members we will select a member who has that political knowledge, education in general plus true leadership qualities and merit, we only have one candidate for that position so I think she will become the party leader until another person challenges for that position that has better merit appears and is maybe voted in.
macnumpty

dnsp wrote:
9. in the traditional family unit which is a female mother, male father & child or children. We promote the family unit as a key basis for a well-ordered and stable society, whilst allowing those who prefer to live Alternative lifestyles to pursue them if they wish.

So how do you promote the 'traditional' family unit, except by affording those you take part in it special privileges that wouldn't be available to others? And in order to that, you end up discriminating in favour of married heterosexual couples and against one-parent families, same-sex partnerships, and co-habiting non-married couples. Part of that paragraph is empty rhetoric - what isn't clear is which part.

Quote:
In regards to Judeo-Christianity that’s our heritage and what I am saying is we would never take that away and that would remain the state religion but on the other hand all people have the freedom to practice there religion freely in this nation.

But you're supposed to be multicultural, so who is 'we'? How large a crossover is there going to be between the state and the state religion? And how can 'Judeo-Christianity' be a state religion, anyway? If you're going to have a state religion, you have to choose one denomination, or create a new Eclectic one. Or are you suggesting that we have several state religions? And how would that work in terms of policy, on matters such as abortion, divorce or gay rights?

Quote:
The said languages are of these isles but they are languages which are on the decline, we would if those people wish in the areas of the country or any school in the British isles would like to maintain there language we would do all we could in assisting and learning and preserving the languages. Maybe even make it compulsory in those areas to have lessons in those languages in schools if that is what the people want. I really don’t see a problem with what we are offering.

But you said that you want to defend English as a common language. How does that square with trying to promote other languages? And do the same rights extend to those wanting more support for Hindi, Gujurati, Punjabi or Bengali? What about the Polish community? Do you afford them the same rights, undermining your 'English as a common language' line further, or turn them down, undermining your 'multiculturalism' approach?

The problem with what you are offering is that half of it contradicts the other half. To implement part of your manifesto, you would find yourself having to rip up other parts. It seems like your trying to please everyone, but - as happens when people do that - will end up pleasing no one. The whole point of a political movement, especially one in its infancy, is that it stands for something and I'm not clear as to what yours does, other than a bunch of inconsistent slogans.
dnsp

macnumpty wrote:
dnsp wrote:
9. in the traditional family unit which is a female mother, male father & child or children. We promote the family unit as a key basis for a well-ordered and stable society, whilst allowing those who prefer to live Alternative lifestyles to pursue them if they wish.

So how do you promote the 'traditional' family unit, except by affording those you take part in it special privileges that wouldn't be available to others? And in order to that, you end up discriminating in favour of married heterosexual couples and against one-parent families, same-sex partnerships, and co-habiting non-married couples. Part of that paragraph is empty rhetoric - what isn't clear is which part.

Quote:
In regards to Judeo-Christianity that’s our heritage and what I am saying is we would never take that away and that would remain the state religion but on the other hand all people have the freedom to practice there religion freely in this nation.

But you're supposed to be multicultural, so who is 'we'? How large a crossover is there going to be between the state and the state religion? And how can 'Judeo-Christianity' be a state religion, anyway? If you're going to have a state religion, you have to choose one denomination, or create a new Eclectic one. Or are you suggesting that we have several state religions? And how would that work in terms of policy, on matters such as abortion, divorce or gay rights?

Quote:
The said languages are of these isles but they are languages which are on the decline, we would if those people wish in the areas of the country or any school in the British isles would like to maintain there language we would do all we could in assisting and learning and preserving the languages. Maybe even make it compulsory in those areas to have lessons in those languages in schools if that is what the people want. I really don’t see a problem with what we are offering.

But you said that you want to defend English as a common language. How does that square with trying to promote other languages? And do the same rights extend to those wanting more support for Hindi, Gujurati, Punjabi or Bengali? What about the Polish community? Do you afford them the same rights, undermining your 'English as a common language' line further, or turn them down, undermining your 'multiculturalism' approach?

The problem with what you are offering is that half of it contradicts the other half. To implement part of your manifesto, you would find yourself having to rip up other parts. It seems like your trying to please everyone, but - as happens when people do that - will end up pleasing no one. The whole point of a political movement, especially one in its infancy, is that it stands for something and I'm not clear as to what yours does, other than a bunch of inconsistent slogans.


We want the family unit to consist of the above, but all family units will have the same benifits its not the childs fault it he or she is born to a 1 parent family. We as the state will do all we can to provide for that family and the well being of the child and family, its not double dutch. All things are based on merit for us what you might need another does not each case is different.

From our site (In Short) section

The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. And is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within on the basis of the principle: The Common Good of the Citizens of the Nation before that of ones Self Interest.

In regards to Judeo-Christianity that’s our heritage and what I am saying is we would never take that away and that would remain the state religion but on the other hand all people have the freedom to practice there religion freely in this nation.

The said languages are of these isles but they are languages which are on the decline, we would if those people wish in the areas of the country or any school in the British isles would like to maintain there language we would do all we could in assisting and learning and preserving the languages. Maybe even make it compulsory in those areas to have lessons in those languages in schools if that is what the people want. I really don’t see a problem with what we are offering.

Go to the site there is a essay on Abortion all you need to know is in the site and we have a Q&A section there also thanks for your time.
macnumpty

But you're repeating the same mantras. What is the point of 'promoting' a family unit if other models get the same benefits? What happens when no children are involved? I agree that all things are based on merit, but you're trying to be all things to all people. For example, you're trying to be non-denominational, but by providing extra funding for birth control, you instantly go against the Roman Catholic denomination. But by saying you don't condone abortion, though would still allow it, you manage you draw hostility both from the pro-life and the pro-choice side.

I have been to the site and it has, frankly, raised all the questions that I've put. In years of following politics, it's only the second time I've visited a party website and had more questions at the end than the beginning. You haven't been speaking to a chap called Mev Brown, have you?
dnsp

macnumpty wrote:
But you're repeating the same mantras. What is the point of 'promoting' a family unit if other models get the same benefits? What happens when no children are involved? I agree that all things are based on merit, but you're trying to be all things to all people. For example, you're trying to be non-denominational, but by providing extra funding for birth control, you instantly go against the Roman Catholic denomination. But by saying you don't condone abortion, though would still allow it, you manage you draw hostility both from the pro-life and the pro-choice side.

I have been to the site and it has, frankly, raised all the questions that I've put. In years of following politics, it's only the second time I've visited a party website and had more questions at the end than the beginning. You haven't been speaking to a chap called Mev Brown, have you?


Ok point taken i will take your advice under consideration and to Mev No lol
macnumpty

OK, but here's some more advice... if Mev tries to get involved, politely decline. Very Happy

Mev was the Tory candidate in Edinburgh East in 2005, then an Independent Candidate in the Livingston By-Election a few months later, then the UKIP Candidate in the Murrayfield By-Election for Edinburgh Council a little while after that . Then he set up his own party (NHSFirst) in time for the Moray By-Election in April 2006, and was going to stand at the top of his party's List in Lothian this May, until he struck up an alliance with Scottish Voice and had to decamp to Central Scotland. Rumour has it he tried to join the Scottish Senior Citizens' Unity Party to stand as one of their candidates as well. His very involvement might kill off your party at the first hurdle - the man's bad luck! Razz
dnsp

macnumpty wrote:
OK, but here's some more advice... if Mev tries to get involved, politely decline. Very Happy

Mev was the Tory candidate in Edinburgh East in 2005, then an Independent Candidate in the Livingston By-Election a few months later, then the UKIP Candidate in the Murrayfield By-Election for Edinburgh Council a little while after that . Then he set up his own party (NHSFirst) in time for the Moray By-Election in April 2006, and was going to stand at the top of his party's List in Lothian this May, until he struck up an alliance with Scottish Voice and had to decamp to Central Scotland. Rumour has it he tried to join the Scottish Senior Citizens' Unity Party to stand as one of their candidates as well. His very involvement might kill off your party at the first hurdle - the man's bad luck! Razz


Ok thanks for the heads up on Mev, like i said we are still finding our feet in this game and i take all people´s points and advice under consideration i want everything with our party to be right. Like i said before somewhere in this site i follow my own code based on merit i am not skilled to lead and we are in the process of selecting a leader its my foundation but i am no leader.
Rinty

"The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity"

There are already two or more christian parties standing in Scotland. If I were you I wouldnt bother.

You havent really thought this through have you?
dnsp

Rinty wrote:
"The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity"

There are already two or more christian parties standing in Scotland. If I were you I wouldnt bother.

You havent really thought this through have you?


And you have not really read our site (all of it) you think you are smart picking up this point but in the site we explain the situation.
dnsp

dnsp wrote:
Rinty wrote:
"The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity"

There are already two or more christian parties standing in Scotland. If I were you I wouldnt bother.

You havent really thought this through have you?


And you have not really read our site (all of it) you think you are smart picking up this point but in the site we explain the situation.


The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. And is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within on the basis of the principle: The Common Good of the Citizens of the Nation before that of ones Self Interest. this is the key part if we took office religion in the state would be just like it is now.
Cado

Got a couple of questions for you DNSP.

1) How have you arrived at your policies?
Some of the policies are from other parties I agreed with on some points but not the others. While others are from my own mind.

Fair enough

2) Are they policies you have a deep, personal belief in?
Yes they are, to me.

Fair enough

3) Are they policies that you have opted for because you believe they have potentially 'sell ability' - and therefore are you just being an opportunist, a salesman if you will?
No I don’t why would I do that, I created my party because I wanted something better than the option we have now I am a British nationalist and I wanted a party to represent that without being racist to any 1 group in anyway.

Fair enough

4) How would you deal with a difference of opinion where no agreement was possible? As in - the only arrived at settlement is "we'll need to agree to disagree".
Like any other party does sometimes things cannot be agreed, in that case we will work to work out a solution or a compromise.

Fair enough

5) How would you deal with a difference of opinion (where no agreement was possible) with another group - who held the differing opinion - (irrespective of the size or significance of that organisation)
The same as above in most cases we would do our best to use common sense and understanding to reach a goal we would both be happy with.

Fair enough

6) Which do you feel is more important? The rights of the individual or the rights of the State. If you believe they are equal - how would you deal with differing opinions that existed in society, where no agreement was attainable - irrespective of the relative sizes of those organisations/groupings etc.
The Common Good of the Citizens of the Nation before that of Self Interest, for all Citizens of the Nation without regards for ethnic origin or religious beliefs, secondly people can have other opinions but in the democracy we live in there are winners and losers so when there has been a referendum or voting on a issue and the vote is in that will be the decision of the people. A question to you because of your line of questioning do you think we are some sort of Fascist party?

I don’t know, however in any case I feel its irrelevant. We live in a Democracy and you’re entitled to your views and you’re entitled to seek supporters of those views for the purpose of election and representation etc.

However it can’t be denied that the perception may be there - you’ve raised that hackles of a few here already. My point being - even if they were you’re views and you were a Nazi - you’d need to be careful not to appear to be, or have some means of deflecting that accusation.

How would you deal with such an open accusation? Ie - someone where to openly accuse you of being a Fascist party and, therefore, by extension - accuse you of being a Nazi?


7) A random hypothetical question - they help take away the boredom of dry questions.
Galileo Galilei proposed that it was the Earth that revolved around the Sun. This was in complete contradiction to the teachings of the Vatican, which believed that it was the Sun the revolved around the Earth. This disagreement has reached an international court. You have the casting vote. Who would you side with? Galileo or the Vatican?
In that day and age I have no idea what I would have thought had I been around back then what would you have thought?

It’s a daft question - but see it from this point of view. Daft questions get asked all the time, some by accident, some by design - you’re not going to look particularly electable if it’s a question you choose to avoid answering out of not wishing to offend either the scientific nor religious establishments.

In any case - you’ve thrown the question back at me - its you seeking my support - I'm charitable but not cheap


A few more questions - going to the other side of things

Cool The local sewer is a mess, it keeps overflowing, there’s s**t, condoms, all sorts everywhere.

What would you do about it?

9) The local neds are always down the bottom end of the park - drinking, taking substances they shouldn’t be, making a noise, the lassies are up to all sorts

What would you do about it?

10) Don’t like traffic wardens, never have, never will. However its recently been changed from being a Criminal Offence into being a Civil offence.

My cars getting a ticket as we speak (actually, in all seriousness, I have got another bloody ticket - even though it’s a residents only area, on a culdesac - and its only the people who live there who park there - and Ive got a bloody residents parking permit on display in my windscreen - the last itme they even tried to life my car - and the time before that they did - from right outside my flat - on a dead end!!!!!!! The only thing I was blocking was a block of flats - in which I live - and no-one else that lives there even has a ********* car - and it’s the same braindead zombie that does it - and he KNOWS what my car looks like - and he KNOWS it usually parked in the residents bit - ie hew KNOWS it’s a residents car - and he KNOWS it my car - and he KNOWS it parked outside my flat.

Yet the b****rd gets it towed away.

That’s what you get for not selling him weed for him to puff down by the river when he can’t be arsed.

…………anyway, what would you do about it?

11) Whats your personnal view on drugs policy?

12) Whats your personnal view of homosexuality?

13) Whats your personnal view of bestiality?

14) Have you ever been to Christiana?

I say that because your web site is hosted on servers located in Copenhagen.

15) Like my music, arts, esoteric stuff, always have, always will.

Hence a big believer in freedom of expression, irrespective of whether the content may be deemed by an individual to be offensive or not. If you don’t like it - switch off.

Anyway - whats your thoughts on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kbW4ibIF8U

My point being - what would your opinion be of individuals whose expression MAY (in your opinion) potentially, be of a danger to your state (as defined in law)

16) Theological question (since you've expressed an interest/knowledge or adherence to Religious concepts) - whats your view on the theological concept of ‘Purgatory’?

17) Animal Welfare

There was a case not long ago in which a stray greyhound starved to death at a Police station in Dalkeith, Midlothian.
What do you believe should happen to those deemed responsible?
(PS. the officer on the front desk was not a member of the public - and therefore would be liable as a state employee)
I say this because you believe (so I gather) that the rights of the State come before the individual, I understand that it has been investigated - still - these questions are asked in the public arena
dnsp

Cado wrote:
Got a couple of questions for you DNSP.

1) How have you arrived at your policies?
Some of the policies are from other parties I agreed with on some points but not the others. While others are from my own mind.

Fair enough

2) Are they policies you have a deep, personal belief in?
Yes they are, to me.

Fair enough

3) Are they policies that you have opted for because you believe they have potentially 'sell ability' - and therefore are you just being an opportunist, a salesman if you will?
No I don’t why would I do that, I created my party because I wanted something better than the option we have now I am a British nationalist and I wanted a party to represent that without being racist to any 1 group in anyway.

Fair enough

4) How would you deal with a difference of opinion where no agreement was possible? As in - the only arrived at settlement is "we'll need to agree to disagree".
Like any other party does sometimes things cannot be agreed, in that case we will work to work out a solution or a compromise.

Fair enough

5) How would you deal with a difference of opinion (where no agreement was possible) with another group - who held the differing opinion - (irrespective of the size or significance of that organisation)
The same as above in most cases we would do our best to use common sense and understanding to reach a goal we would both be happy with.

Fair enough

6) Which do you feel is more important? The rights of the individual or the rights of the State. If you believe they are equal - how would you deal with differing opinions that existed in society, where no agreement was attainable - irrespective of the relative sizes of those organisations/groupings etc.
The Common Good of the Citizens of the Nation before that of Self Interest, for all Citizens of the Nation without regards for ethnic origin or religious beliefs, secondly people can have other opinions but in the democracy we live in there are winners and losers so when there has been a referendum or voting on a issue and the vote is in that will be the decision of the people. A question to you because of your line of questioning do you think we are some sort of Fascist party?

I don’t know, however in any case I feel its irrelevant. We live in a Democracy and you’re entitled to your views and you’re entitled to seek supporters of those views for the purpose of election and representation etc.

However it can’t be denied that the perception may be there - you’ve raised that hackles of a few here already. My point being - even if they were you’re views and you were a Nazi - you’d need to be careful not to appear to be, or have some means of deflecting that accusation.

How would you deal with such an open accusation? Ie - someone where to openly accuse you of being a Fascist party and, therefore, by extension - accuse you of being a Nazi?


7) A random hypothetical question - they help take away the boredom of dry questions.
Galileo Galilei proposed that it was the Earth that revolved around the Sun. This was in complete contradiction to the teachings of the Vatican, which believed that it was the Sun the revolved around the Earth. This disagreement has reached an international court. You have the casting vote. Who would you side with? Galileo or the Vatican?
In that day and age I have no idea what I would have thought had I been around back then what would you have thought?

It’s a daft question - but see it from this point of view. Daft questions get asked all the time, some by accident, some by design - you’re not going to look particularly electable if it’s a question you choose to avoid answering out of not wishing to offend either the scientific nor religious establishments.

In any case - you’ve thrown the question back at me - its you seeking my support - I'm charitable but not cheap


A few more questions - going to the other side of things

Cool The local sewer is a mess, it keeps overflowing, there’s s**t, condoms, all sorts everywhere.

What would you do about it?

9) The local neds are always down the bottom end of the park - drinking, taking substances they shouldn’t be, making a noise, the lassies are up to all sorts

What would you do about it?

10) Don’t like traffic wardens, never have, never will. However its recently been changed from being a Criminal Offence into being a Civil offence.

My cars getting a ticket as we speak (actually, in all seriousness, I have got another bloody ticket - even though it’s a residents only area, on a culdesac - and its only the people who live there who park there - and Ive got a bloody residents parking permit on display in my windscreen - the last itme they even tried to life my car - and the time before that they did - from right outside my flat - on a dead end!!!!!!! The only thing I was blocking was a block of flats - in which I live - and no-one else that lives there even has a ********* car - and it’s the same braindead zombie that does it - and he KNOWS what my car looks like - and he KNOWS it usually parked in the residents bit - ie hew KNOWS it’s a residents car - and he KNOWS it my car - and he KNOWS it parked outside my flat.

Yet the b****rd gets it towed away.

That’s what you get for not selling him weed for him to puff down by the river when he can’t be arsed.

…………anyway, what would you do about it?

11) Whats your personnal view on drugs policy?

12) Whats your personnal view of homosexuality?

13) Whats your personnal view of bestiality?

14) Have you ever been to Christiana?

I say that because your web site is hosted on servers located in Copenhagen.

15) Like my music, arts, esoteric stuff, always have, always will.

Hence a big believer in freedom of expression, irrespective of whether the content may be deemed by an individual to be offensive or not. If you don’t like it - switch off.

Anyway - whats your thoughts on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kbW4ibIF8U

My point being - what would your opinion be of individuals whose expression MAY (in your opinion) potentially, be of a danger to your state (as defined in law)

16) Theological question (since you've expressed an interest/knowledge or adherence to Religious concepts) - whats your view on the theological concept of ‘Purgatory’?

17) Animal Welfare

There was a case not long ago in which a stray greyhound starved to death at a Police station in Dalkeith, Midlothian.
What do you believe should happen to those deemed responsible?
(PS. the officer on the front desk was not a member of the public - and therefore would be liable as a state employee)
I say this because you believe (so I gather) that the rights of the State come before the individual, I understand that it has been investigated - still - these questions are asked in the public arena


You ask some strange questions i think most of the questions you have asked have been answered in my our site seeing as they are my views.
Cado

Just asking you off the cuff - if you end up on the TV etc - you ain't going to have your website to refer to.

Or would you have a wee ear piece with someone whispering in your ear?

All sorts come from all places - I really can't see what's hard about the questions I'm asking - these can and often are day to day questions.

You ain't going to last long as a politician - why even bother?
dnsp

Cado wrote:
Just asking you off the cuff - if you end up on the TV etc - you ain't going to have your website to refer to.

Or would you have a wee ear piece with someone whispering in your ear?

All sorts come from all places - I really can't see what's hard about the questions I'm asking - these can and often are day to day questions.

You ain't going to last long as a politician - why even bother?


I will answer your questions when i get round to it i have a job you know aswell some questions take time to answer, but i will get round to it but a eye piece would be nice then i could be just like Bush Hehe
Holebender

You'd need to be a ring piece to be just like Bush!
dnsp

Holebender wrote:
You'd need to be a ring piece to be just like Bush!


I was just playing around i dont much like the man to much.
Holebender

Neither do I. Could you tell?
Cado

Hole in one.

You've guessed the secret ingredient of my Gaelic sheep dish.

It was inspired by what I thought of the Calamari in Gran Canaria.

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Campaigns/Events...
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum