It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Scotland Vote No In Referendum – Selfish, Scared People, Well Done!

page: 31
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 06:46 AM
a reply to: wmd_2008

No the problem was that the YES voters thought they were going to win in the days before because of polls done, now I know MANY no voters when asked on the street said they would vote yes because they felt intimidated and looking at the aftermath it's easy to see why!

What aftermath?

And why have you put 'many' in capitals. How many and how do you know this?

You won...get over it.

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 06:49 AM

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: KingIcarus
a reply to: midicon

Change isn't always for the better.

For good or bad it was our call to make. We deserved an open and honest referendum.

And you got one.

Despite having literally nothing to gain from towing the line, the Nationalists have barely said a peep about any irregularity.

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 06:55 AM
a reply to: KingIcarus

I haven't mentioned vote rigging or suchlike. Perhaps you missed that. Salmond did ask for an investigation into leaks from the treasury though...and did complain about 'project fear'.

Anything else?

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 06:58 AM
i voted no - so very pleased with the result

there was no vote rigging. This is Scotland not tower hamlets.

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 07:03 AM
a reply to: midicon

In fairness, if Project Fear was a "thing", Salmond could have blown it out of the water by simply giving answering the concerns.

Independence failed because Salmond et al simply left too many questions unanswered. I don't know whether that was incompetence or that they simply didn't know, but it's the main reason they were unsuccessful.

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 07:16 AM
a reply to: KingIcarus
Have seen statements like this a lot that questions weren't answered or lies told but no one ever seems to give a specific question or lie?
I mean this as a genuine question not having a go, what question or questions don't you think were answered?

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 07:25 AM
a reply to: ScepticScot

Prime example of pot & kettle you thlnk that only no voters caused trouble !

In the polls just before Yes had pulled ahead on some yet the final diffence was 10% not as close.

Looking at YOUR post I can have a good guess at your background classic example mate well done.
I know many you would class as unionists that voted yes not everyone is a bigot !!!

edit on 18-10-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-10-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 07:32 AM
a reply to: KingIcarus

I do agree with you that answering the concerns would have allayed many fears. That was a failing on Salmonds part.

There was also the problem that for every expert on one side there was also one on the other. I do think media bias plays a big part for those that listen to nothing else.

I am not so disenchanted and there is no harm in expressing an opinion on how I think it played out. I can also see that the reality of independence might have turned out badly. Who can say?

Now what do any of us have?


posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 07:34 AM
a reply to: wmd_2008
From memory the actual violence associated with yes campaign came down to one thrown egg and a few defaced posters. ( which happens in every campaign) does that really equate to George square?
On the whole the campaign was incredibly peaceful from both sides. Despite media attempts to portray it otherwise.
What do you mean by my background? If it means what I think, you are both wrong and also revealing more about yourself than anything else?

edit on 18-10-2014 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 07:38 AM
a reply to: wmd_2008

I think those polls were done before the love bomb and triple lock nonsense.

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 08:22 AM
a reply to: Freeborn

In answer to some of your comments:

No they don't - the majority of them are inbred half wits who couldn't rig a fishing rod let alone something as public and important as the recent referendum.

Inbred yes. But stupid? No. Plus they have their clandestine personal Terror agency MI5. Remember it was Sir John Dee under the watch of the Elizabeth the 1st that created MI5. And because MI5 are so high up in the Masonic ladder they have a lot of corrupt tentacles all over the country ready to do their bidding!

Unproven. Proof of rigging?

Apart from witness testimonies and video evidence that was good enough to even think about an investigation! If there was no proof then why would the police even be told to investigate?

And anyway where's the proof that it wasn't rigged? Think all other General Elections are not rigged?

The vast majority of the rules surrounding the referendum were put in place by Holyrood and the SNP and by extension Salmond, Sturgeon et al.

If, and its a massive IF, there has been any vote rigging I suggest you point your finger in that direction - Devo Max was always Salmond's preferred option.

Like he said SNP cannot be trusted. And definitely not Salmond as he was going to make himself King and sell us off the the Nazi EU. And he was going to keep our Nazi Queen as head of state!

The debate, referendum and subsequent discussions and statements have raised many questions about the UK's electoral and parliamentary procedures, the conduct and integrity of our politicians - of ALL parties - and even the very nature of our society.
There has been a multitude of empty promises and political double talk.
I personally think that the politicians have come out of the referendum viewed with even more contempt than they were previously perceived.

But has there been any vote rigging?

To be honest I've got to say that given all the evidence available the answer is a most definite NO.

I disagree. There is lot's of evidence of possible foul play. There were no exit polls conducted either which raises eyebrows.

The fact that Scotland is rich in resources makes it even more questionable. The Royal Political Elite were never going to let Scotland go! No way in hell. I like others said before the referendum that they were going to fix this because they wouldn't let Scotland go.

So the CCTV videos of people shuffling ballot papers switching them so the NO votes get bigger and the YES ones get smaller don't do it for you? Or the CCTV video of a guy in the counting office marking X's on blank ballot papers on the NO box himself? Or the media filming the NO vote tables that have YES votes in their piles? Or people going into the polling stations to vote finding out they can't because some unknown person did it for them? Or the 2 Fire Alarms and subsequent counting station evacuations in the Dundee counting offices? Or the woman on video opening up a ballot box and taking out a nice neat pile of votes that should have been a big mess because it has a slot in the top? Or the Glasgow guy in his van picking out some bin bags from trash bins nearby the counting offices that had thousands of YES vote ballot papers?

Or like when I went into vote there was only text on one side of the ballot paper. There should have been identifying numbers on the back. And I wasn't required to show ANY identification and asked only for my address!

How can you say a Definite NO. Does all that not raise a red flag in your head?

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 08:31 AM
a reply to: Tedgoat
Salmond was going to make himself king???? Right...ok....
Also have you ever voted before? It is an anonymous ballot. No id marks in the vote. No id documents required to vote you just give your name.

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 08:50 AM
I was joking about the Salmond King thing.

I know the ballots are anonymous. They were supposed to have identifying numbers on the back but not identifying the person.

Many voters reported seeing nothing on the reverse side of their ballot paper; no unique identification number was included. The Scottish Referendum Act 2013 clearly states that an identifying number should have been included on the reverse side of each individual ballot. The unique identification number on the back of ballot papers, most likely a bar code, was supposed to be used for tallying the total number of ballots issued during the day. This number was calculated by subtracting the number on the last ballot paper still in the book at the end of polling day from the number on the first ballot paper given out in the morning. The result is written on a sheet that is then taped to the ballot box, which is then sent to the designated counting venue for each district.

In addition, by law, the front of each ballot paper must include an "official mark". This official mark forms part of the ballot paper artwork that is provided to Counting Officers by the CCO and it must be kept secret to prevent fraudulent duplication of ballots. What this means is that the ballot papers, their design, and, apparently in some cases, their lack of unique identifying number on the back, was all the work of the office of the CCO. For someone to print their own ballot papers, however, all that was needed was access to the ballot paper design document.

According to official guidelines for volunteer counting agents ('enumerators') at East Renfrewshire's local counting venue, if the number of ballots issued as recorded on the sheet attached to a ballot box did not tally with the number counted at the counting venue, the discrepancy was merely noted and the votes allowed to proceed to separation between Yes and No, and - we presume - included in the final count.

Strange that eh?

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 09:31 AM
a reply to: Tedgoat
Apologies you are correct a unique reference should appear on back of paper. From memory I thought it only appeared on postal votes ( for obvious reasons these do need verified) but is there any evidence that there was fraudulent papers, even wings says the vote was valid!

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 09:34 AM

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: wmd_2008
From memory the actual violence associated with yes campaign came down to one thrown egg and a few defaced posters. ( which happens in every campaign) does that really equate to George square?
On the whole the campaign was incredibly peaceful from both sides. Despite media attempts to portray it otherwise.
What do you mean by my background? If it means what I think, you are both wrong and also revealing more about yourself than anything else?

Well as I have to drive a lot due to my job I was listening to various radio reports and heard NO voters being threatened called traitors and scum bags when asked what they were voting, a friend of mine voted NO and when their family asked them how they voted they were unfriended on facebook by the rest of the family and told not to visit again, it seems to me that YES voters were so sure they would win they just can't handle it!

It was also quite a cynical ploy to allow 16 and overs to vote in this, no doubt wee eck thought that would boost his chances yet I know of at least 2 high schools that did test polls and 90% voted NO.

Anyway like I said in a previous post if we had voted yes we wouldn't be independent for long as wee eck wanted to drag us fully into European membership and that would have been even worse than the current situation.
edit on 18-10-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-10-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 10:17 AM
a reply to: wmd_2008
Cant Say I heard anyone being called a traitor, sure it happen but that would just be numbtys being numbtys. Feelings run high during such a debate but again there was very little actual violence or intimidation. Also it sounds as if your friends family just really didn't like him if he was binned based on how he vote.
Not sure of your logic that you think lowering voting was cynical yet you think young voters voted no?
Can you point to the SNP policy that was to drag us fully into Europe? Stay in Europe yes, join the euro no.
Finally can you clarify your comment regarding my background? Think non Scottish readers of this might find it interesting?

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 10:18 AM
a reply to: wmd_2008

I think it's good that the 16 and overs were given a voice. I hope this carries on and they are given the vote. I think all the parties are pushing for it.
The referendum turned out to be a passionate affair for both sides. If someone fell out with their family, I would suggest that they already had issues. I have four sisters and two brothers and we vote as we please.
If we had voted yes then we may have called for a referendum on Europe. Like so many you want to make it somehow Salmond's call.

edit on 18-10-2014 by midicon because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 10:26 AM

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Tedgoat
Apologies you are correct a unique reference should appear on back of paper. From memory I thought it only appeared on postal votes ( for obvious reasons these do need verified) but is there any evidence that there was fraudulent papers, even wings says the vote was valid!

I copied a heap of stuff from different sites onto a word document so can't remember what site the texts are from. There were witnesses inside the counting stations that when interviewed later by independent media corroborated a great deal of possible foul play!

A very interesting account from inside the Renfrewshire counting venue was provided by enumerator Jim Daly:
"I would like to offer the following observation.

I was an enumerator at the referendum vote count on behalf of Renfrewshire Council. The Returning Officer was David Martin, Chief Executive of Renfrewshire Council.

The vote counting was finished at 2.30am. What then happened appeared to be a mystery to me.

Mr. Martin and his assistants in suits seemed to be in a flap. This consisted of staring at laptops in front of those who were responsible for collating results and strong words were obviously exchanged.

As time marched on Mr. Martin paced around the hall rather nervously.

Then there were more meetings, up a corridor, out of view.

There was one lady with a laptop who, it appeared, was responsible for collating all the votes, but something wasn't going well.

She was taken away by one of Mr. Martin's assistants, out of view of the public, only to return and disconnect her laptop and leave the hall with it under her arm.

Mr. Martin still paced the floor looking uneasy, talking to what looked like aides.

As time passed from 2.30am until declaration time (4.52am), there were visible signs that those in charge weren't happy with something.

During this process there were observers watching everything that the enumerators were doing but not what was being carried out by those recording [numbers] on the laptops.

From 2.30am until 4.52am the reason we were given for non-declaration was [that we were] wait[ing] for a TV slot....

Could be something all together but it does sound a bit suspicious.

Transportation of Ballot Boxes to Counting Venues

Within hours Glasgow police received ten reports from people being told at polling stations across the city that they could not vote because "someone of the same name had already voted." It also emerged that polling cards were issued to minors below the statutory limit of 16, ballot papers were being sold on e-Bay, and ballot boxes were not picked up under secure conditions. Eyewitnesses at counting venues reported individuals arriving, unaccompanied, with boxes of ballot papers in the trunks of their cars.

One of the signatories of the above statement, a polling officer at a polling place, gave more background on what he witnessed:

"Last night we challenged the presiding officer regarding the transportation of ballot boxes in single-manned cars. Our ballot box was not an issue as it went straight from the hall into the van with the guys to take it to be counted. They had to wait until three personal cars arrived with boxes from other areas. These boxes were driven in cars by people on their own. These people were those who also had access to spare zip-ties and tags. We are not insinuating that anyone of these three people would have tampered with the boxes but if this is the system country-wide, we have a major problem. When asked what the rules were, the presiding officer replied:
'I do not have that level of information. You will need to wait until tomorrow. It doesn't matter now anyway. It is too late.'
Naturally we were shocked at her attitude and also her lack of understanding of the legal process. We wrote out a statement. Apologies, it was dark. She also made some corrections. I witnessed all three vehicles but the group of us only witnessed two. Hence we only refer to two. The process was the same for the third. I heard her ask the female in one vehicle,
'Are you alone?'
To which the person replied,
'No, someone followed me but they've gone now.'
We saw her arrive without escort. The second driver was not asked the question, despite also being alone. Why ask unless it is not protocol? Someone here is lying or not doing things correctly. Not happy at all. Not sour grapes. Just facts. Made us all feel sick last night."
Paul Birrell from Uphall, West Lothian gave this report from his local polling station:
"I was officially asked to attend one of my local stations as a Yes representative. I was there for the whole day and night. The things I saw were criminal.

[...] at the end of the night I witnessed the boxes being sealed (bit of tape with a serial number over the posting slot). A West Lothian Council van driver had arrived before this on his OWN.

When I asked him where the guardians are, he looked at me like he didn't have a clue what I was on about. I explained what they were, only to have him and a few of the polling officers pissing themselves and making absurd jokes along the lines of... 'what do you think is going to happen' [...] basically trying to humiliate me, so I backed off.

It is my understanding that the driver was alone and no one checked his van, nor was there any form of safeguards in place to ensure he couldn't take a detour or meet with someone else to change the ballot boxes!!! Pippa Plevin and one other Yes representative witnessed this too."

There's a heap of stuff on my word document regarding this. I'll separate the posts so as to clog up the thread!

posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 01:23 AM
Here's a petition site calling for a recount. If there was no fraud then why all this?

Countless evidences of fraud during the recent Scottish Referendum have come to light. We demand a revote be taken of said referendum, where each vote shall be counted by two individuals, one of whom should be an international impartial party without a stake in the vote.

That would be anyone that has nothing to do wit Britain it's policies and or Masonic in any way. I'm not hitting on Masons. Just saying when it comes to the higher degrees of the masonic order aka what we call the Illuminati then they can't be trusted!

Our #1 concern right now is the number of ballots which were blank on the reverse - this renders them completely void. The staggering numbers of people who are coming forward on our facebook group to tell us about their blank ballots is seriously concerning - what happened to these votes? Are they part of the 660,000 votes which were missing or incomplete, or were they switched out for pre-filled no votes? The turnout was still high - too high for those ballots to have been voided, but if they had been seen and dealt with in a legal manner, blank ballots would not have been counted. Where is the explanation for this? Is the answer in the recently leaked Dundee video where two members - during the fire alarm - were inside, taking papers from their bags and putting them on the table?

Why were Joyce Armour and many others told "not to bother recording ballot box seals when they left our poll stations"? - This is illegal!

Scotland has its eyes wide open, Westminster, and we are not going ANYWHERE!

Petition For Scottish Referendum Re-Vote

My ballot was blank on the reverse. I took notice but never clicked. That was the Aberdeenshire area! The most Sceptical person looking at this Referendum MUST have suspicions that there is something way wrong here!

This Looks like a Fix. There is no doubt about it. But with the establishment blocking it in the Mainstream Media and stopping Police Investigations when there is ample evidence then how in the hell can we have a re vote?

Just the fact they are closing the doors on this around every corner tells you something is F**'d up here!!!

posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 03:45 AM
100% foul play.

Would be nice to actually see a no voter agree with this.

As ted shows there is so much evidence to show it was rigged. It's all there.

new topics

top topics

<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in