Slashdot Mirror
Journalist Claims Secret US Flight 'To Capture Snowden' Overflew Scottish Airspace (thenational.scot)
schwit1 writes with a story in The National (a newspaper which makes no bones about it support for an independent Scotland) describing the charge laid by a Scottish journalist that in 2013 a secret U.S. flight involving a plane involved in CIA renditions crossed Scottish airspace, as part of a secret plan to capture whistleblower Edward Snowden. Alex Salmond, then Scotland's First Minister, is calling for transparency with regard to the knowledge that the UK government had of the flight and its mission. According to the report,
The plane, which passed above the Outer Hebrides, the Highlands and Aberdeenshire, was dispatched from the American east coast on June 24 2013, the day after Snowden left Hong Kong for Moscow. The craft was used in controversial US 'rendition' missions. Reports by Scottish journalist Duncan Campbell claim the aircraft, traveling well above the standard aviation height at 45,000 feet and without a filed flight plan, was part of a mission to capture Snowden following his release of documents revealing mass surveillance by US and UK secret services. ... [N977GA, the aircraft named as involved in this flight] was previously identified by Dave Willis in Air Force Monthly as an aircraft used for CIA rendition flights of US prisoners. This included the extradition of cleric Abu Hamza from the UK. Snowden accused the Danish Government of conspiring in his arrest. In response to flight reports, he said: "Remember when the Prime Minister Rasmussen said Denmark shouldn't respect asylum law in my case? Turns out he had a secret."
I don't know any of the details of what they're alleging here concerning Snowden. But Abu Hamza wasn't "rendered". He underwent an 8 year extradition process involving tons of appeals, ultimately his case to block extradition failed (after receiving binding pledges from the US as to the maximum sentence that would be sought and in what sort of conditions he'd be kept in), and he was extradited to the US to be tried on terrorism charges. Last year he was sentenced to life in prison for them.
The fact that they're playing fast and loose with the terminology on the stuff that's easy to double check here makes me question this report. There might be something to it, but it's not a good start. Extraordinary rendition is a very serious charge to levy. And Abu Hamza wasn't rendered, it was an entirely above-board, fully within normal legal processes extradition.
It's times like this I wish I had a friend named 'The Professor'.
I've wondered this myself, but several sites - including Wikipedia which states "The United Kingdom (UK) comprises four countries: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland." - all disagree with you.
To whipslash,
Let's Make ASCII Great Again. Slashdot must remain an American website with American-centric views, conventions, focus, and everything.
Don't be tempted by the evil suggestions of UTF-8! It's a Eurosocialist conspiracy!
"National honor" really is at stake. The Espionage Act of 1917 is a democratic disaster and leads to most of our current ills (those who installed a "secret government") weren't fools - they see the bugs as features.
If we have users here who support the secret state, they're really against this country's founding principles and can be safely dismissed as cowards or cronies.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
will time will come(within our and their lifetimes) when mass murderers like obama, bush, clintons,etc (criminals worse than any terrorists) will be made to taste their own painful bloody methods.
i hope so!
Yep, in response to the "Ask Slashdot: How Can We Improve Slashdot?" post, I think the first port of call is definitely proper UTF-8 support.
Summation 2
Please direct your complaints to your local Scottish embassy.
The problem here is the term "country" is vauge. In most contexts when people say country they mean "Sovereign state" which Scotland is not (they had an independence refferendum recently but voted against independence). Yet the constituant parts of the united kingdom are reffered to as countries despite not being sovereign.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Hey whiplash -- it's 2016. How about fixing the text encoding?
Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
If we're being pedantic, shouldn't it be UKOGBANI?
Scotland isn't a country.
I suggest you come over and say that, pal!
What we are not is a Sovereign State, though this is may well to change in the near future.
What's "country" got to do with it? It went over Scotland, in what way is that not Scottish airspace? Are you fine with drones hovering outside your windows, because you're not a country so it's not your airspace?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Wasn't this around the time Obama said on TV that he "wouldn't be scrambling jets to get a 29 year old .....hacker"
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
The USA is above international law, after all.
Scotland is a country. It's not a sovereign state.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
If the U.S. controls French, Spanish, Italian, and Austrian airspace, I'm pretty sure they control UK airspace as well (Scotland or otherwise)
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
"What we are not is a Sovereign State, though this is may well to change in the near future."
Your glorious independent future where you get fat on the billions in north sea oil revenue, oh , hold on, that'll be gone in 20 years. The billions in ship building! Oh, thats almost gone already.
Oh I know - whisky and hand outs from the EU. Which will be fitting given how many scots are on hand outs from the state.
Even us Brits have trouble with this sometimes. Scotland is a country, just not an independent one, it's part of a larger entity, the United Kingdom; that bit is clear. But our government is called the "British Government" even though it governs the whole United Kingdom, not just the island of Great Britain. Likewise our army is the "British Army" even though it includes the Royal Irish Regiment, and Northern Ireland is not part of Great Britain. So "British" as an adjective seems to mean "of the United Kingdom", rather than "of Britain". It's probably correct in at least some senses to describe the airspace above Scotland as Scottish, British or UK.
Oh no... it's the future.
Strange how the UK itself disagrees with you. "The United Kingdom is made up of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Its full name is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Great Britain, however, comprises only England, Scotland and Wales..."
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The Scottish government do not retain control of the airspace over Scotland, it is a contiguous airspace zone with the rest of the airspace over England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Therefore its not Scottish airspace, its British airspace.
(a newspaper which makes no bones about it support for an independent Scotland)
"It support"? C'mooon. Maybe you should call "it support" to fix your apostrophe problem.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Britain isn't a country, and doesn't control airspace over Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK, not Britain. You seem confused about the difference between the sovereign country of the UK and the countries of Scotland, Wales, England (which comprise Great Britain), and Northern Ireland (which collectively form the UK).
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Ok. Now that we've established that. Which governing organization has authority over Scotland's airspace? That would be the most relevant to identifying the actual meaning of the original comment.
The status of the component parts of the UK is one of those odd historical things. But in this case it does say in the summary the that source is an strongly scottish nationalist newspaper so they would of course refer to it as scottish airspace regardless.
"The Prince of Darkness should have a sort of distinguished look to him, and let's face facts, I'm no George Clooney."
That you, Adam?
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
As much as I wish you were right, I don't think it will happen.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
....as Scotland isn't a country.
It's as meaningful as insisting a plane overflew "Iowan" airspace.
It may have overflown UK airspace, and I'd suspect that the UK was cool with it (whether they knew what it was doing or not, as I'm guessing US/UK flights don't necessarily engender too much scrutiny).
-Styopa
The confusion of place names in this region affects even how to address postal mail. See the excellent discussion on the various place names in Frank's Compulsive Guide to Postal Addresses.
(n.b.: Frank's agrees that "SCOTLAND is one of the countries of Britain.")
Which governing organization has authority over Scotland's airspace?
Glorious Supreme Leader Obama (may he live forever).
What does legal control over the airspace matter? "Scottish airspace" was used in a geographic sense. It provided more specificity than saying "UK airspace," and therefore made the statement more informative.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
What a misuse of government power and tax dollars. Give the man a freedom award, not an arrest. This is why secrecy is such a mess. We need a government that is wide open with a total release of all information to our public. In regard to Snowden, the US government is the terrorist.
Bitter?? ITYM laughing at a bunch of skirt wearing professional whingers north of the border who blame everyone except themselves for their non existent economy.
Never mind Scotland or other EU/NATO countries, to capture Snowden they would have to fly into Russian airspace, and I don't think Putin would be too pleased about that...
"Scotland is a country"
Scotland hasn't been a country since 1707. Its a region of the UK. The fact that a lot of scots want to believe its still a country doesn't change the reality of the situation.
Then you don't klnow much bud. Scotland is a country in it's own right and even has a separate and distinct legal system.
As wonkey_monkey says.. it's a country and not a sovereign state. It is one of 4 constituent countries of Great Britain.
If legal control doesn't matter then how is the geographic region relevant to the article? I presumed this was hinting at some sort of collusion. If that wasn't the case then how they attempted to get there is pretty irrelevant.
You could argue that but it would make you seem pretty stupid. There are historic and legal reasons why the state is a United Kingdom of multiple countries and why this is not constitutionally similar to the United States of America.
They flew over Scotland. The local officials want answers from the UK government about how this was allowed. That shouldn't be hard to figure out, and isn't any different than things that occur on a regular basis between US States and the federal government, when federal actions occur within state borders.
Additionally, stating "Scottish airspace" provides more detail than simply saying "UK airspace," making the statement more informative, and providing the basis for the Scottish interest in the matter.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
This story was published in 2014....why is it on /. today?
What about all the people with nothing more than a Model 33 Teletype?
NO MORE LOWER CASE.
Have gnu, will travel.
If by our you mean the US, the use of the term state to refer to something that is not an independent nation state is at odds with most of the rest of the world.
Except for the United States of Mexico, the Federated States of Micronesia, and perhaps a few others.
Then again, some thought when the USA was founded that the states should be independent. Abraham Lincoln pretty much put a stop to that, though.
But our government is called the "British Government" even though it governs the whole United Kingdom, not just the island of Great Britain.
"Great Britain" refers to the largest of the British Isles. Ireland is also British, once known as Little Britain.
They'll probably still call it the British Government after Scotland secedes, so as not to upset the Welsh.
The first person in the thread to get it wrong was immediately corrected by half a dozen people, some citing the UK governments own published material on the matter. So yes, I think it's perfectly fair to consider people who continue to get it wrong... while in many cases insisting on their own false correctness... to be morons.
Imagine all the people...
Ireland is NOT British, as 'Britain' means 'the United Kingdom'. If Scotland leaves, they will still be called 'Britain' and 'British Government' as the United Kingdom will still exist, albeit in a smaller part of the British Isles.
You are getting somewhat confused. I can try to help:
1. Great Britain is a geographical term, meaning the largest island in the British Isles.
2. Britain is a political term synonymous with "the United Kingdom"
So yes, the government is British as it represents all of Britain (the United Kingdom). The British Army is similarly named correctly.
...and even has a separate and distinct legal system.
Not merely distinct but one with some admirable features. I've always thought that its choice of three verdicts was both interesting and has a certain wisdom to it. Of course that system is under pressure.
"... this verdict is sometimes jokingly referred to as "not guilty and don't do it again"."
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
'Britain' is a political term meaning precisely the same thing as 'UK'. 'Great Britain' is a geographic term for the large island. I can understand your confusion, but you are unfortunately wrong on this subject.
I don't anyone would say Welsh Airspace or Cornish Airspace.
In America things are much clearer. There is US, Canadian, Mexican and Texan airspace. And the US can do pretty much it wants in any of them except Texas.
yeah I remember a few choice characters getting the "not Proven " verdict.. it's a case of "we know you did it but we can't prove it" as I have been told.
And let's not forget that they have their own national football team that can play internationally. What other criteria could one possibly ask for?
And Hong Kong technically isn't a country either, although to call it part of China is also misleading, as it is self-governed, has its own visa and border policies, and laws passed in China don't apply to Hong Kong, and vice-versa.
Really the concept of a country is a vague term. Depending how you look at it, Scotland, the UK, and even the EU all are country-like, and the fact the Scotland is a country and the UK is made up of four countries just comes down to semantics.
Fucking Slashdot. I read the summary, think "hmm, that's interesting", and want to read through the comments to see if people are talking about the plane that was used, maybe some other links to information about the plane, the flight path, where it landed or took off from, how they thought they were going to capture Snowden, or any number of other interesting things, and here you guys are 8 comment levels deep arguing about whether or not Scotland is a country.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
I understand that this touches a nerve, but Ireland is most definitely "British", not in the sense that it is ruled from London (anymore), but it it IS one of "the British Islands". The bigger one, known as "Great Britain" would be the part containing Wales, England, Scotland. So while Ireland is still ire-land, quite obviously, it's still "British", since it's part of the archipelago.
Rather confusingly though, the post you're replying to is wrong too, because he applies logic to anything "British", "Little Britain" would not be Ireland, since it's the next biggest island in the British archipelago, no sir. That would be Britannia Minor", which we today call "Brittany", or An Bhreatain Bheag, which I just found out would be Wales, of all places.
You really think a mere elected official (a black one at that) *really* has complete control over the US organs of security? They are a priesthood all to themselves and answer to no one - especially politicians.
How would you know, you're not even a True Scotsman!
Anyways, the whole thing is funny; they're offended that an airplane flew over at 45,000ft without their permission, and they feel entitled to information because they're somebody important from... a different government than has control over the airspace. So they don't know if it was with permission, and they're not the people who would be told.
What I want to hear about is, why do they think an overflight affects the village councils and things that they fly over? This isn't a case of a supersonic plane bursting local tomatoes or anything. They didn't even know they should be "concerned" until somebody told them it happened. Too bad nobody pointed out to them it isn't their business to manage it.
Just imagine how the "transparency" they seek would work. The US and UK are close military allies. If every town council can have access to any information about secret US flights there, then the US would have to stop all secret activities in the UK that matter. Things that are just part of frivolous plots are schemes could still continue, of course; but anything with military importance would have to be done somewhere else. Preparing for D-Day? We'd have had to go in through Italy.
If these fools had half a clue about the subject, if they had put some serious thought into it, they would have come up with something better to ask for than to sniff around under Uncle Sam's drawers. He's not gonna pull `em down for you, give it up. And the UK's legit governing authorities are not going to interfere with their closest military ally when nothing actually happened in the UK. Of course they let us fly over whenever we want. They let us park nuclear submarines there when we're driving by, too, and all manner of airplanes with secret weapons on them. How would it work to still be military allies with a "special relationship," and yet allow town councils to make queries about secrets that don't affect them in any way?
Civilian air traffic control for Northern Ireland is handled by the Prestwick control centre of the National Air Traffic Service, which is licensed by the CAA (a Department for Transport statutory corporation, owned by the British government).
Yes, the government that covers the UK is colloquially known as the British Government. So yes, the British Government does control the airspace over Northern Ireland.
Wikipedia mixes different languages together under the same heading; American English, British English, even Aussie. In a case such as this, it would be expected to be British English. In British English I have no doubt that it is as wikipedia states. However, in American English it isn't true. Scotland is called a country formally, but that is simply part of the formal naming of the province of Scotland. Just as, American States would often not be considered "states" in British English.
Presumably everybody saying that Scotland isn't a country is saying so in American English, and people saying it is a country are saying it in British English.
And some idiot in Scotland is looking up at airplanes flying over at 45,000 feet, shaking his fist shouting, "Nemo me impune lacessit!"
To which I reply: Scots wha hae, hae. Scots wha hae nae, hae nae.
Davey, Britain can't mean that. It isn't even available for consideration. One is an ancient term with established meaning, the other is a modern political unit. The ancient term can't be defined originally or primarily in terms of the modern term.
Or to translate that for you: Hoo dae ye say 'United Kingdom' in Scots? A dinna onerstaun. See approach proud Edward's power - Chains and Slaverie. Scots wha hae. Damned few an' they're a' deid.
Presumably most of the Irish agree.
Scotland was part of Britain long before anything was united. Unity is not a necessary element of living on the same island, and historically is not the standard state of affairs.
"You disagreed after I contradicted you, you must be a moron."
I'm not sure your analysis really leads where you want it to. Especially if you're trying to correct somebody's American English statement, that is true in American English, with British English in which the same words are not true. They don't have to be an moron to continue disagreeing, but if somebody has to be one, you're a prime candidate.
British describes things that are owned by the government of the United Kingdom whenever the context is within an era such as the modern one when all of Great Britain is united under the same sovereign power.
When reading history it is very important to understand these terms. Historical discussions will use British to describe everything on the island, or just the things from the island. Often in descriptions of battlefield movements and things the term British is used there to describe the native armies on both sides separately from the foreign armies also on the field. You can't just presume that the words all mean the same thing they would mean if the evening newsreader said them that way. Often there is a very clear, very explicit, non-ambiguous but complicated variety of semantics.
I'll give you an example. There is a battle near the border of England and Scotland. There are French fighting on the side of the Scots, and Welsh fighting with the English. Somebody says, "The Brits are winning!" What does that imply? It implies the battle is a draw, a tie, but the French are all getting slaughtered. In all the many wars between Scotland and England, both sides were British. Get over it.
If you want to insist the airspace is not Scottish on a pedantic/semantic/legal basis, then don't use colloquial terms like British in your argument, because you're wrong. If you want to use informal terms, then it's not incorrect to call it "Scottish airspace," and you're still wrong.
Either argue with technically correct terms, or use informal ones. But be consistent. You're trying to win your point by arbitrarily redefining terms to match your argument.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Just shoot the damn journalist and Snowden in the face and be done with it. This guy is so tiresome.
My curiosity is why they think this was:
1. A rendition flight at all
2. Had anything to do with Snowden
I think people have a higher opinion of how much Snowden matters than is actual reality.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Ok. Now that we've established that. Which governing organization has authority over Scotland's airspace? That would be the most relevant to identifying the actual meaning of the original comment.
The same country that has authority over Scottish law - Scotland.
Britain isn't a country - it's a set of islands.
The UK isn't a country - it's a nation made up of 4 countries.
I'm not your pal, friend.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
That's a problem of historic nomenclature. Originally the States were independent nations acting independently, and banded together for common goals. And in frequent disagreement. This was under the "Articles of Confederation". Some people thought this was a bad idea, so they got together a revolutionary committee and wrote the "Federal Constitution". They had no legal authority do to so, but many were strongly connected politically, so they got away with it, and got most of the original states to agree (after including the first 10 amendments). Officially the states were still independent nations, but bound together a bit more tightly. The Constitution was supposed to be a limitation of what the Federal Government was allowed to do. And the states were still in theory independent states. As such the common reference was "These United States". Then there arose a massive disagreement and about half these states decided that they didn't like the federal government, so they were going to split and form a new government. They called it the Confederacy. Well, the Federal government didn't like that much, and so a war was fought to keep them from leaving. (There was no enabling power to allow this to be done in the Constitution, and that was supposed to mean that the Feds couldn't stop them, but military power disagreed.) Since then the US has been "The United States", and the states have continually lost power which has accrued to the Federal government in defiance of the Constitution. Patrick Henry predicted this whole thing (well, sort of) when after reading the constitution he said of it "I smell a rat. It stinks of monarchy."
So the states are called states not because of an improper use of the term, but rather as a part of the process of history. One may confidently predict that if the EU survives over the centuries, some similar process will occur.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The Scottish upper FIR is controlled by something called Scottish control. The FIR boundary is actually south of the Scottish border.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
45000 feet is not "above standard aviation altitudes". Bizjets quite frequently fly up that high.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Given that most of the members here are Americans, I suspect that few of them could point to it on a map. I'd predict a three way split between Ireland, New Zealand, and that one that looks a bit like a camel.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I'm all for all the allies I can get and Mah faither's fowk come frae Scootlund.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
I just thought I'd point that out in case you needed a bit of perspective.
Because Snowden's masters don't think twice about transporting radiological toxins into other countries, in order to render political refugees dead.
Her majesty's governments of Canada, NZ, Australia, Isle of Man, Jersey etc aren't part of the UK.
This isn't some random appeal to "I'm right because *I* say so." au-thor-i-tah. This is a case of easily-verifiable facts. The error in question was about the organization and legal status of the various entities which comprise the United Kingdom. One can goto any number of sources to find the correct answer. One of the cited sources was the UK government itself.
To present a falsehood as a fact, and continue to hold said falsehood as true even when you are corrected and provided an authoritative source is either moronic or trolling.
Imagine all the people...
Back on alt.fan.pratchett we used to refer to Americans and Yukians.
You Sir, and I reserve the right to not agree with everything you say, have just found a spot on my "friends" list. (It's how I keep track of posts that I might want to read.) And no, no... I seem to recall that you've said a number of things that I don't entirely agree with and that's okay - you've always presented such logically and some dignity (well, that last part made *me* snicker).
Nope... I don't always agree with the conclusions you make - usually because we've a marginally different perspective but nothing so major as to remove all commonality. So, onto that friends list with you. Why? Well, you worded it well and are factually accurate (though I suppose we might argue a detail or two).
The sad thing is, that posting such and knowing such is what got you there. See, I find it sad that you had to explain that to someone who is, in all likelihood, an American. They're also likely to be an adult and likely to have graduated from at least high school. Yet you had to, or felt you had to, explain the very basics of why we're a country and what it meant.
I recently had the chance to explain who Amerigo Vespucci is to someone. I guess they can be forgiven. They're a young kid who hasn't taken American History yet. I see your post as something similar. At least, in my case, he's just a kid. I've also kind of adopted 'em and his little brother but that's a long story. They're well spoken and intelligent - quite inquisitive, really. They're a joy to have around the house and I live vicariously through their exploits. But, 'tis a long story and they're horrible time-stealers! Buggers keep eating into my /. time!
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Anything old, such as the concept of borders and governance, is bound to have some ambiguity. This concept, in particular, has had a whole bunch of varied implementations over the years and spans the globe by its nature. Pinning the word to a single definition that is accepted by all is likely an exercise in futility.
It's probably best to not use the word as having a strict definition but to avoid it, where possible, by being less vague. I don't imagine that will satisfy a whole lot more people but it might lead to fewer instances of genuine confusion. So, there's that.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Yet no representation at the United Nations? Weird....
The United Nations disagrees with you.
Anyways, the whole thing is funny; they're offended that an airplane flew over at 45,000ft without their permission
Because of course no one in America would care if a Russian or French plane flew over mainland USA at 45,000 ft without permission.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
The term "the British Isles" definitely includes Ireland, and it's a geographical rather than political term. The British Isles include the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, which are also not part of the United Kingdom.
This stuff is quite confusing even if you're English. Er, British.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
And some idiot in Scotland is looking up at airplanes flying over at 45,000 feet, shaking his fist shouting, "Nemo me impune lacessit!"
Translation: dinna fuck wi' me pal!
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
I'm all for all the allies I can get and Mah faither's fowk come frae Scootlund.
An impression worthy of Dick van Dyke himself.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Right, but your reply right here? It does not show that you read the post you're replying to. Instead of just waving your hands as if I hadn't said anything, and presuming I would consider that, you need to alter your words to take into consideration what I said. Show enough theory of mind so that I think you understood my point, and I might consider whatever your opposing view is. If I can't even tell that you read my words, I'm not going to attempt to identify your ideas.
Nobody in America would think that our government doesn't have the authority to give that permission, or claim that the local town councilors need "transparent" access to the government's approval process for military overflights by major allies.
Details are important, try to pay attention to the details you're responding to.
If it was too long to read it all, just skip over it without replying please.
Even if they did, so what? It's not illegal.
Maybe the Scotts wanted to give the plane flying at 30,000' the finger or something?
BTW, send over some more scotch.
Like any country with several borders with peers, it's a complex mess. That means just about any country that isn't the US or Canada.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
The Act of the Union 1707 Disagrees with you ;)
I'm not your pal, friend.
Clearly, you are unfamiliar with Scottish turn of phrase.
Bitter?? ITYM laughing at a bunch of skirt wearing professional whingers north of the border who blame everyone except themselves for their non existent economy.
Yeah well. You'll soon have managed to get rid of us and then you can start of the Welsh and the Irish and those irritating Northern Folks, who moan when it gets a little bit damp. A sad, selfish and short-sighted attitude, typical of the Southern "Elite".
http://southpark.cc.com/clips/...
It was a joke, but I guess I screwed it up.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?