An American's opinion on the Scotland Boycott

I said "umm", "and", "but", and "actually" a bit too much...

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• scotland
• boycott
• americans

[TheChowie]

It is Scottish tradition to be kind and compassionate.

In 1320 Scotland wrote in the Declaration of Arbroath "there is neither weighing nor distinction of Jew and Greek, Scotsman or Englishman". It wasn't until 1948 (628 years later) that the rest of the world agreed that all are equal with the declaration of human rights.

......

[thatdumbkid]

@TheChowie: The rest of us are as wee bit slow. Especially over here in the US...

[Lenin200488]

The trial was a joke.

The evidence was circumstantial.

Many family members of the Scottish victims campaigned for his release

The guy was innocent.

End of.

[thatdumbkid]

@Lenin200488: Yes. There are so many sides to this story. The media over here in the USA assumed he was really guilty and portrayed Scotland as being terrible.

We Americans are bad to overreact. At least, stories like this make it seem that way. 

[thatdumbkid]

I think you misunderstood. I wasn't talking about the victims' families at all. I was talking about misinformed Americans (and others) who want to boycott Scotland for something the people couldn't have stopped. The people are being blamed, even though they did nothing.

"so why not work together" ... I'd like to see us start doing that. We're allies, after all.

And I'm terribly sorry for your loss. There's nothing I could say that would take away that pain. You have my condolences.

[MrScreamGuy]

thank u 4 stckin up 4 my country! U rock!

[JohnMacDonald1]

It's not Scotlands fault. How can you blame the release of a terrorist on every single citizen of that country. There's one person you need to blame; a Mr Kenny McAskill, Scottish Justice Minister, who in what must've been a moment of pure insanity, somehow saw a justifiable reason to release abdul baset Ali al-mugrahi. I met him in a cafe and told him exactly what I thought of his poposterous release

[pluto4847]

@TheChowie

You are right. What does it matter anyway? This might sound rotten to say, but maybe its a good thing all the banks are collapsing.

Ever so often, this world needs a good shakeup to start all over again. Examples are 'The Black Plaugue,' 'Asteroid Impact (Althought that's a little extreme,' Volcanoes,

Maybe Cats will take over as the dominant species when we are all gone.

[TheChowie]

@pluto4847 You didnt realy back up anythin there, u just said we arnt compassionate. the fact that we have a 'released on compassion' law kinda backs up my claim, it means that anyone can make a mistake but if they or someone is dying they can be released because of that 4 a decided time. i agree that this guy shouldnt have been released but the scots didnt have a say in this dicision so why would americans even concider a boycott, anyway it never really hapnend in the end which can only b good

[pluto4847]

@TheChowie

Really? Since when were the Scottish compassionate? Not when I was over there. So don't be talking bullshit unless you can back it up pal.

[GORDON47866]

i wish the usa would not boycott us scottish people because i would love to go over there and we didnt have a say on the magrahi thing its fucking shit he should die

[Lenin200488]

@TheLoyalOfficer

The mass murderer would still be seen as innocent until proven guilty. However, I agree that it would be natural to accuse him/her. Would it then be justified that the mass murderer be automatically convicted, even if the evidence was questionable to begin with? I would say there're more questions concerning his "guilt". But why do we not look at Iran? I think Ahmedinijad would do the same in Gadaffi's position, and they had less to lose.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@Lenin Considering that there are so many questions about the bomber's "innocence", Kaddaffi's behavior towards his OWN people says he would have no hesitation or compunction whatsoever in ordering the deaths of hundreds of foreigners. From a behavioral standpoint, the two situations are definitely related.

Damning evidence right there. This is far more connected than a "wife beater on the same street as a murder." How about a mass murderer on the same street?

[Lenin200488]

@TheLoyalOfficer

It was an international act of terror. Parliament would have had it's hand in it to assure the rest of the world that it was being taken care of and possibly encouraged the Judges by any means necessary. I abhor Gaddafi as much as anyone, but no, to me that wouldn't indicate guilt for an unrelated crisis. If a murder happened in the same street as a man who beats his wife, would you instantly accuse him? The pacifist in me disagrees with the war while the humanitarian agrees.

[TheLoyalOfficer]

@Lenin200488 What did the Parliament have to do with the conviction? Isn't that the perview of the courts?

And if Kaddaffi is so ruthless with his own people to provoke a UN force resolution against him, then don't you think this indicates his guilt with this bombing? His treatment of his own people should be a signal of his (lack of) character and wickedness.

Not that I wanted this war with Libya, BTW, which is some sort of French wet dream - but that is another issue...