SEVERAL years ago, with Sir Clive Woodward in charge of the British Lions team to tour New Zealand, no Scots players were selected for any of the three Test matches.
It was difficult not to experience a degree of schadenfreude at the whitewash inflicted on the “British” Lions then.
More recently, with a sense of deja vu, we received the announcement that Warren Gatland had included a mere two Scots in a 41-strong squad to tour New Zealand this summer, despite our decisive victories over Wales and Ireland. Now we hear that plans are afoot to merge the Scottish Rugby Sevens team into a Great British squad.
Scotland has just won the London Sevens Tournament for the second year in a row, beating New Zealand and England. It is inevitable that the new scheme will see Scotland’s players overlooked yet again.
After 300 years of being sidelined I suppose we should be getting used to it by now.
James Stevenson
Auchterarder
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forget politics, what about our security services?
AFTER the appalling murders in Manchester we are now witnessing the usual political kneejerk reaction (Soldiers ruled out of extra security on streets, The National, May 25). We have pictures of combat-ready troops marching in London to reassure us. The usual case of locking the door after the horse has bolted.
I don’t know about others, but I am not at all impressed by this political play-acting. Frankly I am more interested in what the UK security services were doing in the past, than what soldiers will be doing in the future.
The media are reporting that the bomber was well known to the UK security services. They were even informed that he supported public bombing and had information about how dangerous he was from a member of his own family. They also knew that he was linked with others in a “network”. In spite of this his brother and father were picked up in Tripoli yesterday so clearly they were being allowed to travel freely between the UK and Libya.
So what I want to know is what were MI5 and MI6 playing at, why did they fail the public in this instance and has this security weakness been identified and corrected? That for me is the issue, not the political pretence at increased security.
Andy Anderson
Dunoon, Argyll
THE Manchester Arena attack was as successful as the terrorists involved intended it to be. Nice soft target, come in at the end to avoid security, maim and kill as many kids as possible. Truly horrific and a reminder that this is a war.
This brings up the issue of the Government’s first responsibility to us all: defence and protection from harm. But now we learn that although the security agencies have some 4000 persons listed as being of special interest, the police do not have the resources to apply surveillance to all and must prioritise and just hope for the best. With a General Election only two weeks away when will opposition parties criticise the Tory government for not spending what it takes to combat this threat? The media, too, should lead the charge and go beyond the grief and suffering to remind the people of what has not been done to protect them.
Millions of pounds to recruit and train police and security must be a better outlay than billions of pounds on Trident.
Ken Ford
North Berwick
I’M going to Barra on Friday but I have no tears left (Barra unites in prayer as more attack victims are named, The National, May 25).
For those with loved ones now dead or lying injured, on the edge of death, there is no relief for the aching gap where their stomachs and hearts used to be.
Nor will there ever be.
We know that grief, and share it, but then our own lives take over and we forget as we so quickly forgot the women and children killed in that school by the US-led coalition just a few weeks ago.
The boy that carried those explosives in Manchester has been called a coward in the press, which doesn’t speak about the killers of those people in the school.
This concert bomber was mad, deranged, manipulated. It is possible he saw no future for himself and was quite prepared to do the unthinkable. The police knew him and so did the secret services but they, all our armed forces and all our nuclear weapons were not enough to stop him killing and maiming our loved ones.
The way the radio, TV and the mass hysterical media spread the news is exactly why it will happen again, and again. It is the publicity these sinister killers seek.
The official response is ludicrous! Had the police and the army been brought in the day before this disaster then it would still have happened but the people who run our lives cannot see the link between the school there and the concert hall here, or will choose to ignore it if they do.
We need to weep for them all. We are an inclusive nation. We will not kill people because they will not trade with us but we will open our arms to shelter those distraught from the bombs and guns carried to their very homes by people we elected to do exactly the opposite.
Some we shelter will turn out to be deranged and they will do bad things too but that must not change our compassion.
We have no place on the world stage and so we are unable to encourage communications but it is only this way that solutions will become possible. Not in my lifetime though, not in my children’s lifetime either, or of their children.
These remote control, long distance murders by our armed forces are not about protecting you and me on the dance floor, they are about protecting the rights of our traders in distant lands.
It is unacceptable to me.
Yesterday it was Paris, today Manchester, and tomorrow?
I will stand with the people of Barra tomorrow and all our thoughts will be on the girls and all those suffering so deeply in Manchester.
Deeply sad regards.
Christopher Bruce
Taynuilt
THE Trump administration’s disregard for the sharing of security information protocols may be the first step in allowing Britain to regain its sovereignty and independence from US hegemony. It is because of successive UK governments’ willingness to follow US interventions willy-nilly that we have gotten into this terrible mess.
A British security and foreign policy autonomous from Trump’s incompetence would, arguably, make us more secure than we are today.
Geoff Naylor
Winchester, Hampshire
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel