Tripping Up Trump

Protest group’s credibility gap

Published: 12/12/2009

DONALD Trump’s plans to build his golf course, hotel and housing complex at Menie Links, near Aberdeen, have been criticised and opposed at every turn by the vociferous and very active Tripping Up Trump protest group. It has operated under a cloak of anonymity and cultivated the impression that it is composed of ordinary people concerned at the perceived damage the development would do to the coastline. Now we know differently.

The group is orchestrated and financed by people whose home and work is largely well away from the north-east of Scotland. Its co-ordinator, though originally from Banchory, now chooses to live in Glasgow, while its legal adviser, website designer and several leading members also hail from the central belt. It relies on donations from online supporters following the withdrawal of its unnamed millionaire financier.

It now becomes crystal clear why Tripping Up Trump was so coy about the people it counts as members, and its credibility is comprehensively blown apart. It is only right that those whose quality of life will be directly affected by Donald Trump’s plans should have their say on the development. It is, however, now apparent that the opposition has been orchestrated by an organisation which has little interest in the area it claims to be trying to protect. Indeed, there is more than a hint of suspicion that many of its members are those who will attach themselves to any green cause, regardless of its location and regardless of the wishes of the people it involves directly. This newspaper has given a voice to all those who have wished to become involved in the debate about Donald Trump’s plans. That courtesy was extended to Tripping Up Trump in the belief that it was bona fide group of local environmentalists. Today, it has been withdrawn.

Reader's Comments

Now this has cheered me up, and it was about time this had come to light.I am all for genuine arguments against the projects, but this group was faceless and full of people who this course would not affect. They have no real concern about projects like this. Their only concern was disruption.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

The people who are being bullied by Trump and his supporters into leaving their homes are local residents. Justice has no boundries. If the Press and Journal was doing its job and investigating and exposing what is really going on then perhaps the local residents would not need support from elsewhere
Bob Marshall
Report this comment

A very interesting piece of fiction with little relevance to the facts. I am surprised at the P&J stooping so low that they openly admit that they will now only print one side of the argument as stated in the last line of the editorial above, not that that is much different from previously anyway. As a local I have been significantly involved with Tripping Up Trump and will continue to be so, as will our sponsor.
David Milne
Report this comment

Balance? Reporting the news? I thought that was the job of journalists. And I hoped that the editor of the P&J had some interest in reporting news - regardless of interests at play. But it seems I was wrong.
Debra Storr
Report this comment

Shocking declaration of editorial bias! You seem to forget that the original development application was turned down by the local council. It was only kept alive by being 'called in' as a matter of 'national significance'. Many people oppose the 'development' because it threatens civil rights, human rights and the entire Scottish judicial system. Aberdeenshire, believe it or not, is still a part of Scotland. Greed for sillar is at the root of all support for Mr Trump's plans.
D. Cruickshank
Report this comment

What caniving. The P&J are just determined to make everyone who hates the thought of evictions feel like unworthys. You're a disgrace.
manniewe naename
Report this comment

By the way P&J. You're dumbing down an awful lot of people.
manniewe naename
Report this comment

I say the support the locals were giving, and who they were giving it too on the open day at the whithorse, and also the lack of support at the A.E.C.C. The C.P.O i am against but i do understand where the council and Trump are coming from,me and the wife have thought long and hard about this issue and we both feel we would deal with Trump or another developer if the need did arise. Evening Express is making a point, up till now they have published both sides and i think they will continue to do so. I do feel on both sides there are narrow minded members, that really read what they want to see, and can not see many of the facts. This group like many others are full of people who do not care for the community and people who only look to fight against everything no matter if it is for the good or bad. The facts on Tripping up Trump website are even stretched. I have e-mailed the T U T website with a few factual details and they have written back once but have still not placed the facts on. In my opinion they have no interest in right or wrong only in making a name and causing confusion. As for the BALANCE you speak of Mrs Storr may i refer you to your own web blog.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Sorry to go on, may i also add some people on here do have genuine voices and arguments both for and against. People have looked at the facts and have argued their own valued points. Unlike TUT many are local and have things at stake. These people i do respect. TUT has been set up by a distant voice, who will find another cause to bleat about once this development goes ahead, in whatever way shape or form.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

A shocking piece of propaganda which calls into question your commitment to the facts. In your enthusiasm for Trump dollars you have glossed over breaches of planning law, the destruction of of a pristine stretch of coastline and the plight of those who face eviction by compulsory purchase. A cynical demonstration of your true values. Btw I am a signatory of Tripping Up Trump. I live and work in Aberdeenshire.
Jonathan Williams
Report this comment

What a load of pompous claptrap. It reads like a Trump press release (and I'm quite sure that it's deliberately timed to complement the Donald's latest rant about "suing" TUT...). If you're really so concerned about this debate, we'd love to know the P&J's editorial views on the legality and morality of the use of CPOs to benefit commercial developments.
Bill Harrison
Report this comment

The P&J can influence its own credibility by declaring (which it has manifestly failed to do so far) whether or not it is for or against local residents losing their homes to the profit motive.
John Strimmer
Report this comment

Owners and occupiers of land within a SSSI must apply to SNH for consent to carry out certain operations that have been notified to them. Applications must be made in writing. ok did Trump follow all proceedures or not and as to the P&J true journalism is to report on both sides not just one looks like they can be renamed Trump Press and Journal
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

You lot are moaning about the stance of the P&J but they have published letters and views of both sides. The TUT have very little factual information on their site. And when any facts are questioned they ignore the person that has bought this to light. I am all for honest debate, but a factual one, not one based on fiction. The website and the main investors of the TUT are NOT local, they in my view are people only looking for a cause whether it be good or bad.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Yes Mr Fraser lets look at facts a SSSI site protected by law along comes Trump and is allowed to build on it not on as to the man himself look at his website he does not invest his own money but profits from others who are encouraged to put money into his schemes and quite a few seem to have had problems
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

SSSI sites are only protected when a wind farm is not in the for front. SSSI sites have been used for commercial use for a very long time (Wind Farms) and they will continue to be used when people see fit, for there own purposes. No not profits, investors.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

facts are Mr Trump is destroying a SSSI site and trying get the use of CPO's for a private development and face the truth his so called developments are facing court actions
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

Come on boys. we all know that Neil Fraser is a true believer of the Trump fiasco. The P & J has written about both sides of the problem but has been biased towards to the Trump side. I was all in favour of the Menie golf courses etc. until he wanted more plots, after getting his way especially when the SNP Government pulled their weight on in. If he had carried on with his original plans, all this palaver would not of happened. So at the end of the day, it is the Trump greed that has festered this arguement. Maybe Neil Fraser could explain (as he is such a fan) why "Trump" had to get more plots. That is why so many people are angered. Pure Greed by the Trump family
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Maybe Neil Fraser can enlighten us since he is such a fan on the Trump site. Why does Trump now want more plots???? Why were they not included in the original plans, the ones that the SNP government pushed through. I was all in favour of the plans for the golf course, that is until Trump got too greedy and wanted more. So if anyone is to blame for the fiasco we have now. Just look at the greed on Trump family. So please Neil Fraser, enlighted us as to why these plots were not included in the original. Could it be that maybe he would not have been given permission. This attitude of greed has angered many people. not the golf courses etc. but his total arrogance that he can have his own way by walking roughshod over people. Glad to see that Neil Fraser is not one of the ones likely to be evicted. OK for some
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Well come off it would you really want the so called farm on or next to your site, i think no. Why the extension to the first plan, i have no idea. But anyone with half a brain must have seen this coming. But you really could not have a championship course with one 18hole course, could you. Yes i no this is for profit, but what about the first wind farms that where erected, holdings and SSSI sites where effected and CPO's were used,all because businesses and goverments had visions, be it good or bad, this was and still is for private companies and is all about profit. As to why am i such a fan, well i am a fan of this, also of the by-pass, and the airport expansion, I believe all these could give Aberdeen/shire a future. A future to enable my children to stay in a place they love. Lets face it, the dunes will not be destroyed, we will still have access. Some people like to always see the negative side no matter what. Look into the future do you see Aberdeen, well without developments like this, i think if you do you will see a much changed Aberdeen, a much poorer Aberdeen and a ruined city.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Ok Mr Fraser I have seen the farm you mention on a few occassions and to admit I have seen a lot worse and remember he runs it alone, in fact I have seen worse housing estates in Aberdeen as to access to the dunes well the golf courses will be private with little or no right of access to them and I doubt any SSSI sites have been built on ( please list them for me ). Also remember a large percentage of these houses will be holiday homes so the only thing that will be good in the area will by the by-pass ( Oh I believe that is already in the pipeline )
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

This editorial could equally read: "DONALD Trump’s plans to build his golf course, hotel and housing complex at Menie Links, near Aberdeen, have been created and manipulated at every turn by the vociferous and very active Trump International Golf Links group. It has operated under a cloak of pseudo-concern for the area and cultivated the impression that it is concerned with the welfare and jobs of ordinary people and a sustainable future for Aberdeenshire. Now we know differently. The group is orchestrated and financed by people whose home and work is largely well away from the north-east of Scotland. Its co-ordinator, though quoting his Scottish roots at every turn, now chooses to live in America, while its legal advisers, website designers and several leading executives also hail from far away. It relies on cash injections from its patron, a well-known and often-named millionaire financier, and vocal and thoroughly biased support from its poodles in the local “news” media. It now becomes crystal clear why TIGL was so coy about its real plans, and its credibility is comprehensively blown apart. It is only right that those whose quality of life will be directly affected by Donald Trump’s plans should have their say on the development, however, constant opposition and innuendo has been orchestrated against them by TIGL, who have little interest in the area other than making money it out of an area it claims to be trying to protect. Indeed, there is more than a hint of suspicion that many of its executives are those who will attach themselves to any money-making cause, regardless of its location and regardless of the wishes of the people it seeks to deprive of their homes. This newspaper has forthrightly failed to give a balanced voice to all those who have wished to become involved in genuine debate about Donald Trump’s plans. That courtesy was extended to TIGL in the belief that it was bona fide group of businessmen seeking to benefit Aberdeenshire. Today, it has been found out."
John Strimmer
Report this comment

The farm is not a working farm.Scotland has a right to roam, no trespass law, as long as you do not cause damage. I and my kids still have never been stopped from roaming this site. SSSI sites up near Inverness and Huntly way M Ford fought to get this site. Yes a large number will be holiday homes but they will be let most of the year round. Look in the google search bar you will see them, or ask M FORD. No mateer if the tenants are people on holiday or permanent homes they will spend and visit other courses. The money into the economy will be a godsend.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Wind Farms."This would have the advantage of being wholly endorsed by Councillor Martin Ford who was perfectly prepared to see an SSSI, together with 1 ,500 acres of forestry at Ciashindarroch, near Huntiy, totally destroyed in support of such an application in early 2004". This is from an Aberdeenshire site, and has neither been changed or added too. Firth of Forth have a proposed wind farm as do site on the islands, also Inverness has proposed sites, many others in England have proposals for sites. Many are in the construction stage, and a few have already been up and running. I will research further if you so desire, but well most searches can and will give you the information you desire.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

By the way D Trump has only claimed he has routes in the North East, he has never like the TUT organisation claimed to be local.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

I am a member of Tripping Up Trump for the same reason many other local residents are. If the central belt can over ride the democratic decision of our elected council then it is absurd to attack a group for having members/organisers from the central belt. And this argument is all over that well known local, Donald Trump, wanting to build the best lawn in the world. Do you see what I did there?! Well done P&J for a well balanced piece of journalism.
George Brebner
Report this comment

The P&J are correct with their article and have presented the facts. TUT do not hold the moral high ground and should not be lecturing the North East on morality based upon assumptions and statements which lack content and could be construed as slanderous in the extreme. The right to object is not in question here but raise your objections based upon fact and stop making up lies. It has taken me a long time to gain enough courage to actually comment on what's going on here but like the majority in the North East who are all positively supportive of the project I am sick to the back teeth of the antics of TUT and unfortunately that now includes those who may have genuine objections but have associated themselves with the now suitably exposed charlatans of TUT. Note that this P&J Editorial has been linked to Tripping Up Trump's website so subsequently the TUT members appear to be hogging the limelight on this page.
Diane J Balmedie
Report this comment

"Well come off it would you really want the so called farm on or next to your site, i think no." Well Neil Fraser, perhaps Trump shouldn't have bought the land next to neighbours he didn't like - after all, the Forbes' were there first. Personally I don't see a problem with the property - it seems honest and lived in to me, just like many folks' homes. Where do you live, New York?! I stopped buying the P&J two years ago due to the ridiculous bias against the Trump opposition. This 'news'paper needs to realise that it is alienating a large percentage of its potential local readers. Save money now and stop wasting it buying this rag.
Sara Jameson
Report this comment

I live local, very local in fact. I also buy the P&J and EE. You see no problem with the land, perhaps you should go and have a look then, but yes this is honest and lived in, but in no way a working farm as TUT try to say it is on many occasions. But this is not about the state of the land, this is about the disgraceful behaviour of TUT. Have you looked at the website, it is full of half truths, and fictional comments. I would luv to hear a genuine argument, but up until now there has been very few. A many not based on facts.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

"The group is orchestrated and financed by people whose home and work is largely well away from the north-east of Scotland" Well well Greenpeace, stop saving those Whales, you dont live or work in the South Atlantic!!
Secret Jackson
Report this comment

Amazing how the attitude changes when you have no argument. My problem is they professed to speak for the locals, and the information on their site was mainly fictional. And when i pointed this out, i was ignored. At least Greenpeace's website carries facts.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

The P&J article is inaccurate and a deliberate smear on a group that has never hidden its origins. Whenever anyone is critical of Trump and his organisation he threatens to sue, and supporters (including Aberdeen Journals) trot out the "local" argument. This I suspect is because whilst there is a lot of us locally who are opposed to the way in which this development has a been allowed to go ahead, there is a great deal of opposition from the wider community. The Trump organsiation cannot have it both ways. i.e. this is of national (nae international even) importance then object when it generates critiscm from further afield. As far as access go. There is the right of responsible access , but try walking across a golf course when they are in play Mr Fraser. Currently we can all enjoy wandering over the dunes but that will stop. As to fiction, Donald Trump is the master of this. Check out where in the golfing lists his other "World Class" courses come. Finally Michael Forbes has never claimed to have a "farm".
rohan beyts
Report this comment

What a load of spurious nonsense. So TUT should only represent people from the NE, who live in the NE? By that logic, I would no longer have a vested interest, having moved away from Aberdeen with work. But also, by taking this logic to reasonable end, the editor of the P&J, Derek Tucker, should refrain from commenting on this - by choosing the editorial line - as he is English by birth; not born in the NE, not allowed an opinion. The P&J used to be a quality local paper, which represented the people of the NE, no matter who they were. It is now better used for lining rabbit hutches.
Simon Christie
Report this comment

I consider myself as 'local' as I am a Scot living in Scotland. I am a member of Tripping up Trump as I consider that this is an issue which will affect this country. So the P+J thinks that only 'locals' living in the North East should have a say in this debate - this implies that what is going on with the Menie estate will not affect anyone else unless you live there - I think not! Trump et al have shown themselves in their true colours - a bunch of bullies who think that all they have to do is 'flash the cash' and who or whatever stands in their way will surrender. When a site of special scientific interest is gone it is gone forever - is every bad decision taken in the interests of economic growth? I am sure that the generatiosn to come will not thank us for this.
Joyce Gartshore
Report this comment

Neil Fraser you state," By the way D Trump has only claimed he has routes in the North East". I would be grateful if you could expand on this as I have only ever heard Mr Trump associate his Scottish routes through his mother, who came from the Western Isles - not North East Scotland. I anticipate however you have made another mistake, as from previous statements you clearly can't distinguish fact from fiction.
Sean Ashley
Report this comment

Oops Scottish roots Sean 1 mistake, that is it, unless you wish to actually do some research yourself and prove me wrong. I am not TUT, i do admit to mistakes and if i can i will rectify them.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Neil Fraser, I am happy to tell you that I have done my research, unlike yourself. And after reading the dozens upon dozens of news paper articles (especially American) and numerous other information regarding Donald Trump, you may be assured without doubt that I am indeed a well informed individual. And I can recommend to other misguided supporters of The Trump Organisation that you will find an excellent and factual account in the Tripping Up Trump website. A very good read over Christmas.
Sean Ashley
Report this comment

Luv you to tell me where you got your info, and enlighten me where the other mistakes i have made are. I have enlighten TUT website of there mistakes and all they could do after the initial contact was ignore me. The site stretches the facts as much as could be stretched. Much of the info on the site has not been researched, and instead they choose to shoot down the character, not the business. And yes i have read the website. But alas if you would like to believe in the articles on the website that is your choice.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Neil Fraser, how about you enlighten us as to some of these 'mistakes' on the TUT website. If you are not able to back up your accusations, quit trolling and leave these message boards for actual discussion, rather than vitriolic abuse.
Simon Christie
Report this comment

Do some research, there are mistakes and i have notified TUT of these, but i am here to add my views. Not once has the TUT site not came up with a legitimate argument against this development. These remarks are legitimate, funny your post, did you mention (trolling)
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

Ok Mr Fraser first we need to protect the habit of all animals that are there along with any fauna in the area if the habit and fauna is altered then the existing wildlife will either die out or move and the reason the area is classed as a SSSI site is the flora and fauna along with the wildlife which is unquique the dunes in the area. The Trump plans will no doubt destroy the habit and and the face of the dunes will change for ever. As to your remark about supporters not living in the area we who care about our enviroment will support those who protest against bulldozing the enviroment in the name of progress maybe you are against Greenpeace who travel around the world acting against similar ideals
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

Not worried whether you are local or not. The wildlife will return as it has in many developments like this one. The only change of the dunes will be the grass. My problem is about TUT's claim to be local when they are clearly not, and the fascicle website they run. As for Greenpeace i respect what they do, but the cause a fair bit of damage with their travel, as do many green protesters. Not seen Greenpeace around of late, but at least their argument would be genuine, i do not think this is anywhere similar to there causes. I have discovered past developments on this scale and bigger, much of the wildlife returns as do new species.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

You obviously do not understand or know why a SSSI site is created and protected by law the wildlife habit in the area is unquigue to the wildlife in the area once changed the move or die out suggest you study conservation to be able to grasp some simple truths
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

And i suspect you have not done your research on previous, sites. Sites where habitat has been destroyed and much of the wildlife has returned, there will always be one or two that do not return. But wildlife does move on regardless of developments. I have studied past sites and many larger than this. Wildlife does return although you will always get people scaremongering. May I suggest you study past developments.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

you seem to know so much about conservation where did you study it because you seem to know so much but understand so little about why SSSI are protected by law. Also when the local habit is destroyed the wildlife that depends on it does not return so I suggest you stop trying to be Mr Trumps spokesperson and look at the bigger picture or at least take off your blinkers
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

Not studies just researched past developments, but just like us wildlife can and will adapt. Not all that i do understand. Not trying to be a spokesman, just presenting the facts, and not scaremongering. I do understand some will not come back, but i also understand we will get new species coming to our shore. But with all the climate change that is predicted we will be losing a lot of native species anyway. Knowledge comes from research, not from books. But if you do go and research other developments of this size you will see before studies and after studies of the sites, and you will see many of the predictions or forecasts where wrong. But also like this site, you have some who say it will be dramatic to the wildlife, but also some who say there will be no significant loss. As i am no specialist i must go with the research i have done, be it right or wrong, and until i have heard a clear argument against this development, i am still all for it.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

I do wish both sides could have worked together to make this development easier on the wildlife in the area to adapt, but it seems two great bodies cannot have the sense to compromise with each other. Both sides could have done much more to make this transition smoother. I do pray this development is like the many i have read about with only minimal disruption to the wildlife.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

you still missed the point this development is adding human and chemical (golf course use of chemicals) change to the habit the others you go on about ie wind farms do not do the same and if we believe all about climate change how many people who will live in this development will drive cars adding more carbon to the atmosphere as well as waste which will increase what the local authority will need to dispose of, can I go on listing the problems which Aberdeen will have to add to its budget which is all ready millions in debt and facing serious cuts
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

Not all courses use or need to use chemicals. Wind farms do change the environmental landscape, ie bird flights, and access roads, along with the making of the wind turbines. Aberdeen's problems arises from their own greed, and the first cuts here should have been to the amount of councillors, also the building of their new headquarters. The waste would increase anyway, and the impact of the old tip at blackdog caused an awful lot more harm than the Trump development would ever do.Car usage would increase regardless of this development as it does year on year. This is the last post i will place on this thread as it seems you have an idea of different rules when it suits. I will still wait to hear of a genuine argument. It does all boil down to which activist and which environmentalist you believe, I hope the sites i have studied and the people i have spoken to are correct, but only time will tell. But if we did listen to some of the environmentalist we would do all we could to stop the cattle breaking wind, as they say that does more harm than a few cars.
Neil Fraser
Report this comment

I suggest you check out what American people think of Trump developments and what is going on with them as to your arguement about the other sites name them and i will check them out and as to the rules i follow i studied conservation and believe in saving our heritage whether it be a building or a piece of land because once it is destoyed that is it you cannot bring it back and yes cattle are the biggest cause a lot more than cars
Michael Bruce
Report this comment

Neil Fraser, please shut up.
Tee Francis
Report this comment

To post a comment, please login using the form at the top of the page, or click to register.