BS: scottish independence

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:48 PM

It's ALWAYS been about politics.
If there was a 'true' Labour party ready and able to win the next election, the referendum result would a dawdle to predict.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:48 PM

On the subject of Alex Salmond, how naive you must be if you think Alex gives a toss for homosexual "marriage" :0)

Alex long ago learned that it is much more productive to USE the media, than be used by them.
I would explain the strategy to you Ian, which involves the sacrifice of some votes for a larger number mustered by the media, but you are obviously too much of a political simpleton.

Alex has been focused on this moment for most of his life and it looks like he has carried it off ....against all the odds.
Even to come close would be a victory.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:35 PM

I rest my case.

Instead of this being about a nation, it is, in the minds of the yes campaign, about party politics.

Or the art of putting a gun in your ear to kill the flea lodged within it.

The leaders are going together to show that this is not about party politics but about defining the boundaries which parties can operate within.

Sheesh...

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:17 PM

Desperation has set in :0).
Cameron, Milliband and the Liberal wally, are coming to Scotland tomorrow as a team to fight Alex Salmond.

As a fucking team!!!    Millibands job is to fight the Tories not the Scots. Just shows what a hypocritical bunch of arsehole we have in Westminster.
Hope they get chased for their fucking lives.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 12:14 PM

But back to the flag - the Union Jack is composed of the crosses of Sts. George (England), Andrew (Scotland) and Patrick (Ireland). If they take out St. Andrew, which stripes, exactly, disappear?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 11:33 AM

Did you meet a bloke called Alex Salmond or the politician who championed gay marriage through the Scottish Parliament and wrote a manifesto based on equality, opportunity and using trade and wealth creation to provide social justice?

Just asking, because over the last few months, they are the things you say you hold in contempt...

Instead of talking about narrowing the gap, I was too busy creating new sustainable jobs for many years, including 35 new expanding business jobs in Airdre and Cumbernauld back in the '90s, not to mention a few thousand worldwide. The consortium who bought me out still do in fact.

Don't lecture in areas you don't understand. I accept you might believe his ideas on how to create wealth, but he is a politician and oil industry economist. Neither being too well suited to explaining how an independent Scotland works.

Even if you take his well meaning wish for social justice as a positive, which it is, and even if you agree with him that only an independent Scotland cam deliver it, which is pushing the bounds of fantasy but let's give him the benefit of the doubt...

One simple statement says it all. When pushed on the subject of currency union, he said that the UK government would have to negotiate with him because he would have a mandate from the Scottish people for them to have to.

If the leader of The SNP doesn't understand what independence means, we can't expect the little people to comprehend it. So I shan't shout you down Alex, not on this, because it is not nice to blame people for not understanding.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 08:51 AM

The NO group consists of well heeled pensioners, early retired pen pushers, and Westminster politicians trying to save their jobs and their investment. Personally I care more about providing a viable future for our young people, by providing proper jobs to do, and training to do them.

Scotland is one of the most prosperous countries in the world, but under Westminster rule our wealth goes to waste.

Jobs created at taxpayers expense to keep obsolete weapons of mass destruction on our soil.
Social security payments to keep our youth in poverty instead of providing training or any sort of inspiration.
An obscene wealth gap between rich and poor, which should be narrowed dramatically( hint Ian, that's what REAL equality is about, but I never hear YOU pushing it.)

I think I know Alex Salmond a little better than you Ian, having met and talked with him several times, away from a political setting.

He is a supreme politician who knows what to say and when to say it to achieve his political objective....which is Independence for Scotland. He has worked wonders to turn a twenty point negative into a 1 point positive in one month.

The new Scotland will have no time for smokescreens.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: selby
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 08:09 AM

Don,t panic we are sending Cpt Mainwaring Cpl Jones and Pike to sort it all out tommorow. Frazier was heard to say we all Doooooomed
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 08:06 AM

It isn't that the pound falls and rises. That's with the tides.

It was the specific huge fall as a reaction to the possibility that Scotland may do something disastrous after all... The markets don't like it. Politicians deliver promises subject to markets allowing.

Rather ironic considering the reputation for prudence coming from Scitland, the home of Adam Smith, that SNP are beginning to buck such a reputation and start marking ther citizens for recklessness.

Mind you, the no campaign needs a good spanking for giving the yes campaign ammunition. The yes side are starting to actually believe what Salmond is telling them!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 07:36 AM

There are various things the NO campaign are doing that I find a bid odd. Yesterday, they made a huge song-and-dance about the pound falling, and indeed it has fallen again so far today - by 0.06%. It may continue to fall. But if it rallies at all in the next ten days or so, it will look like yet another attempt to frighten the YES voters that is unfounded. It may not rally, of course, but if it does ...


Then there's all these undecided voters. Very often, in a vote like this, the undecided tend to vote for no change. But the NO compaign, in an attempt to win back the yes voters, is emphasising 'no change' is not an option. That could easily do them more harm than good.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 05:20 AM

Look on the bright side. The 0.0001% of like minded Scottish idiots that Akenaton speaks up for will be their problem not ours if enough gullible fools believe The SNP. It might be worth it just to see what happens when SNP don't need to appeal to bigots to get power any more l. I wouldn't bother buying a leather card holder for your membership card if I were you Alex... Salmond is about as liberal as you can get.

The rest of us are far more interested in the real occasion of this month. The launch of the new iPhone. Hopefully an iWatch too if we are lucky. Something for Santa to put in my stocking.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 03:30 AM

As somebody used to say....."Get used to it!!"    :0)

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 01:27 PM

Anyway, it only goes out 12 miles and there's naff all in that. Beyond that, it's carved up by International Treaty Scotland's not party to, and the markets are not open to them.
And the new powers plan is being presented by the Broonie. My Sainted Aunt. Where's Gove when you need him? ROFL.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,DaveRo
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:53 AM

GUEST,Dazbo at Work: [The maritime border]... normally ... follows at the same angle (north eastish in this case?) as the border when it meets the sea.

It's more complicated than that, and depends on a concept called 'the baseline' - which is shown on maritime charts.

Territorial Waters

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Dazbo at Work
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:26 AM

Even if Scotland stays in the UK will the Scottish fishing fleet be decimated as they currently land more than their share of the UK's quota? Haven't seen much written about this.

Also, it seems (but I may be wrong) that the SNP seem to assume their area of the North Sea starts from a line due east of where the border meet the sea north of Berwick. Apparently, this is not the case as normally it follows at the same angle (north eastish in this case?) as the border when it meets the sea.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:09 AM

But they are not "on their own."

If anybody hadn't noticed, the thought that King Eck could get his way has had the money markets worried and the pound has fallen already this morning.

No. Cause and effect is greater than with those who bleat that it is their affair and nobody else's. The very thought of it standing a chance of happening has, according to one market analyst in the FT today, caused £30 million less available for the Scottish budget for next year than was forecast last week.

And that's before people vote to trust a lying chancer....

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 10:16 AM

It seems very shortsighted to throw away the status quo because you don't like the Tories, who may very well be out of power by the time independence comes.

There is a strong body of opinion which says that independent Scotland will face severe economic problems, won't be able to join the EU on the terms Salmond claims and won't be able to use the currency as he claims. Even if some of this turns out to be wrong, it suggests a high degree of uncertainty which the "Yes"es prefer to ignore.

Salmond also expects the rUK to roll over and give Scotland everything it wants as if it were its right. Sorry, if you choose to leave the game you don't get to keep the ball. English, Welsh and NI voters will expect our politicians to negotiate hard in rUK's interest (just as Scottish politicians will be doing) and not give Scotland an easy ride. And if it ends in tears, which I hope it won't but is a real possibility, don't come to us for a baleout - we did that 300 years ago and what thanks did we get?

I'd rather Scotland stayed and very much hope it will, but if you choose to go then I wish you good luck, but you're on your own.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Dazbo at Work
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 08:41 AM

I find it very annoying when the Scots bleat about not being represented. Ok they may only have one tory MP at the moment but in recent years they've had two Scottish prime ministers, a Jockocracy of senior cabinet members and English laws being voted on by Scottish MPs (and supplying the majority to allow them to pass) on matters that English MPs cannot vote on for Scotland.

Sounds very much like a spoiled brat saying "I'm not playing anymore" when they don't win a game and go off in a huff. How often in the last hundred years or so has England not got the government it voted for because of the way the Scottish vote went?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 08:10 AM

If Scotish citizens were to vote to separate, how would its citizens share the UK government debt (£1,377 billion in 2013)? How, and when, would this be determined and paid (or transferred)?

Has the potential new interim governing body (or the "yes, lets separate" proponents) put forward a strategy to deal with the potential economic impact of starting a new government and economy - while starting out with a debt and likely significant deficit?

While I realize personal debt is different from government debt. However, there are some similarities.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 07:39 AM

100 up

By the way what expert in the EU has stated that Scotland would automatically be a member state on declaring independence? For the life of me I cannot find a single one.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 07:37 AM

"Couldn't care less whether, or not, you accept what has been stated by many who are experts on the EU" - Teribus

"Yes, it doesn't matter who says what, or how expert they are, Teribus will insist that only his version of reality has any value."

Not my version Scabby - the President of the EU's and the immediate past-President of the EU Commission's - I rather suspect that they do know what they are talking about

By the way Scabby do you still actually believe that Eck got legal advice on the subject of Scotland's continuing membership of the EU? If so you must be the only person in Scotland that believes that proven lie by Jowly on the TV.

It would appear that it is you who is - "basically sticking your fingers in your ears and going "LALALLAALA! Not Listening!"

"The defence force that Scotland needs would be what was deemed appropriate for defending Scotland. And according to figures from the MOD, at present there are only 14,500-ish MoD personnel based in Scotland, so the 15,000 you scoff at from the White Paper would be more than that."

Ehmmm Scabby while there may only be 14,500 personnel based in Scotland there are a further 191,350 regulars backed by another 181,720 reservists available should they be needed.

Put into perspective the Police Scotland manpower for StrathClyde would be bigger than your army.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 06:48 AM

The question is still one of the Scottish tail wagging the English dog, it's all of a piece, Scottish arrogance - when in reality, it was Scottish political and economic incompetence which caused the last recession, and to a great extent the one before that, the consistent downside of my entire working life. This is a nation which allows corruption around it's one significant production plant, and wants independence when the costs and terms are undefined, which is quite sufficient proof of its economic incompetence in and of itself. Illegal immigrants will get the vote, it seems, whereas English citizens aren't being allowed a say if we want to keep you or not. It does make our own political masters much more loved either, for that matter.
Belgium is adequate proof that you need a population of about 20 million to be autonomous - it only survives because NATO and the EU put a sizeable cash injection into the economy. London has carried Scotland for far too long, so if you want to stand on your own two feet, good luck to you, we'll be the better off for it. Belgium has 40% more population and is in a far more temperate zone to produce food in, with far better arable land.
So awa' wi' ye and good riddance.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 05:50 AM

"As I understand it any new country joining the EU must take on the Euro the EU will not let Scotland get away with keeping the pound as an independent country as it would set a preceden"
    this could produce a similiar situation to ireland , where a whole black market exists, based around smuggling and trading across an economic border, what also happens is that people living close to the border, cross over to do shopping on the other side when the two currencies go up or down.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 05:17 AM

They, like you would be if you understood what you type, are driven by dogma and put philosophy before pragmatism. Considering the chancellor is a member of The Conservative and Unionist Party, you can answer your own question.

zzz

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:54 AM

"The most galling bit about this is The UK government bending over backwards to appease voters in Scotland."

Why do you think they are even bothering to lie?

They know the wealth and wealth creation potential that Scotland has.

If Scotland was the economic basket case that you imply, England would be delighted to get rid of us, rather than bribing us to stay.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:19 AM

Norway is a good example. I have family out there and whilst the country is rich and their high taxes promise them one hell of a good state pension etc, there is a problem..

The problem is that to survive economically, they have to trade with The EU whilst due to xenophobia at referendum time, cannot be members.

The result? Being bound by the dictats with no say in them whatsoever.

That is the situation an independent Scotland could find itself in. Using sterling would mean being bound by the interest rates and fiscal policy of The UK. At present, Scottish people can influence that. But they can't after any independence... Monetary union? The law requires a referendum. No party can take us into fiscal union without a referendum, as those advocating the Euro (myself amongst them incidentally) have found.

If Scotland doesn't take its share of debt, it could never dictate anything to anyone, as The IMF would put it in a peer group with Somalia. If it does take on its share of debt, it will be interesting to see what parties can promise to provide in the first elections...

The most galling bit about this is The UK government bending over backwards to appease voters in Scotland. The message should be clear. How many Salmond promises will he negotiate away once he wins? What single promise can you rely on?

More importantly, how can you be sure the promises don't make his party policies a constitutional obligation if he argues, rightly, that they form part of the independence criteria?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:05 AM

Condition of staying should either be compulsory loss of Scottish accent or compulsory sub-title screens to be worn by all Scots - particularly Dick Gaughan!!!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:48 AM

"I have no reason to suppose that the new Scotland and the remainder of the old UK, will not do what is in their own interests; and that will mean a shared currency and comparative parity in exchange rates.
We will be a huge trading partner of the UK."

Post referendum the UK WILL DO what is in it's own interest - and so far all the leaders of the main political Parties in the UK have said that there will be no Currency Union with an Independent Scotland as it WOULD NOT BE in the UK's interest to enter into such an agreement with a foreign country. Don't know about you Ake but I believe them, there will be a General Election in the UK before 10th May 2015 and any UK mainstream Political party that advocates a currency union with independent Scotland will be committing political suicide, they will be slaughtered at the polling stations across the UK.

80% of Scotland's trade is with the rest of the UK. While the rest of the UK is a vital market for Scotland, Scotland with it's 5 million population is not and can never be a vital market for the UK - simply a matter of scale.

On gaining independence Scotland WILL find itself OUT of the EU and as such the UK will find itself penalised by the EU for any trade between the UK as a member state and Scotland a non-member state.

GSS asked above how Norway manages:

"norway is not in the eu, and like england has its own cuurency but has treaty arrangements, why is this not a possibilty for scotland?"

Norway is a member of EFTA, it pays into the EU and has to comply with "most" EU rules - it can do that because it can afford to do that - newly independent Scotland will not be able to do that, and at the moment it does not look as though an independent Scotland will have a currency over which it will have any control over.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 11:35 AM

I thought the Homes were Scottish nobility? Or do they intend stopping at Peterborough again? As oft times commemorated by the Rail Notwork...

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: selby
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM

I am afraid akenaton you missed the point about young people they have all been shafted and it started with tuition fees brought in by a Labour government. All parties have been happy to do it.
No where in my previous statement did i mention Scotland as a region.

But in the spirit regions Home rule for Yorkshire.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Stu
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:14 AM

"Cameron is not going to do too much to stop them leaving"

But for the union to fracture on the tories watch is disastrous for them; they are the unionist part of the UK, it's even in the name of the party. One only hopes the party implodes in the most spectacular fashion possible.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:13 AM

Akenaton just did something that made me smile, possibly for the first time ever in his case. He said I don't understand politics.

This from a man who uses the word "liberal" as a sneering insult yet claims to be a member of a liberal political party. Salmond, for all his dangerous actions has a very liberal socialist agenda, with social equality, universal education and equitable access to health and social cate at the very heart of what he wishes.

Yet Akenaton joins SNP. His hatred of his own nation, The UK, seems to be a higher agenda item than hating gay people after all.. Obviously hasn't realised that post war social policy enables ignoramuses to be in a position to be ungrateful in the first place.

Back to reality. Is King Alex I going to use his celtic tiger axis with Ireland and Iceland to pay for it all? {chortle.}.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:12 AM

Scaremongering abounds. I have no reason to suppose that the new Scotland and the remainder of the old UK, will not do what is in their own interests; and that will mean a shared currency and comparative parity in exchange rates.
We will be a huge trading partner of the UK.

Additionally, if Osbourne is serious about "giving" us massively more powers and benefits after a NO vote, how does he expect the rest of the UK to react?

It is a panic reaction, a pack of lies that could never be put into practice.......due to the inevitable and perfectly understandable reaction by the ordinary people of England and Wales.

The only way we can possibly achieve control of Scottish affairs is by a YES vote in the coming referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:31 AM

In passing, did nobody notice the Yes campaign was using Kate Tickell's NSPs in its advertising?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:29 AM

Ake, the consequence of doing it is therefore a huge loss to Labour: Cameron is not going to do too much to stop them leaving, and the crash will be epic, as Scotland's too small to either stand alone or dictate its terms.
The alternative to not having the Pound and not having the Euro might just be not having any currency at all, which would mean a bankrupt government and barter.
It may be that if Scotland is a member of nothing its only option will be to take the pirate route, becoming a home for every tax policy in the book. That at least was the implication of Salmond's recent comment that if Luxemburg could do it, so could Scotland, conveniently forgetting that Scotland has a hundred times larger population that Luxemburg: to achieve a comparable standard of living would mean them becoming the biggest hole in the economy in the world, virtually selling out to the Russian mafia. Good luck, lads.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Stu
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 07:33 AM

C'mon Scotland. Do it, for all our sakes.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 06:58 AM

Selby, the fact that Scotland has one Tory MP and is ruled by a Tory led government, amounts to lack of political representation.
We are a nation, not a region.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: selby
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 06:41 AM

Young people in Scotland are no longer prepared to be treated as second class citizens by a government which does not represent them.

Sorry akenaton your statement above is incorrect

ALL young people in this country are being treated like second class citizens and a lot have an enormous amount of debt already in their lives. Young people in Scotland even with a Westminster Parliment have had a better deal than English kids

Keith

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 05:00 AM

Ian, you obviously have no understanding of politics.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:49 AM

UK government having smelt the coffee, are now resorting to simple blackmail to avert defeat.

If Scotland votes no, we may be "given" new powers, including tax raising powers.

One question if these powers are available and in the interests of all, why are they not in place NOW?

Don't believe the lying bastards, vote NO and Scotland will be crushed, we will be given the same status as Wales, who's public services are being decimated and unemployment runs at rates above the national average.

Young people in Scotland are no longer prepared to be treated as second class citizens by a government which does not represent them.
They still have enough pride in themselves to take responsibility for their own future.
We are a small trading nation with the ability to pay our way, with a bit left over to train our young folks, and provide decent public services......We don't need unregulated immigration, we don't want to rule the world, or be part of global corporatism.

Salmond is a great leader who has performed wonders in influencing public opinion, and conducting the Scottish Government.
IF we win the vote it will be a testament to the guts of the Scottish people.....and the man himself!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:44 AM

I still say there is a possible case for losing a Westminster perspective but this referendum has not explored it. This has been about putting forward the manifesto of one party and saying if vote yes, you are committing yourself constitutionally to some of their policies. By saying independence means education this, NHS that and nuclear the other, that is what people are being hamstrung with, regardless of governing party after the first elections.

It says something when Salmond is gaining in popularity despite lying to Parliament and saying Westminster politicians will change their minds but he won't change his.

This is a leader and his party that can promote and deliver gay equality and marriage whilst recruiting the likes of Akenaton to their cause.

Fucking frightening.....

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: selby
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:14 AM

As I understand it any new country joining the EU must take on the Euro the EU will not let Scotland get away with keeping the pound as an independent country as it would set a precedent.
When told by the major Westminster parties,that he cannot keep the pound the treasury and EU agreeing Mr Salmond sits there and says they don't mean it. On this issue alone that to me would be a worry.
I really could not care less whether Scotland goes or not I do care that once they have made their bed they lie on it for either good or bad.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 03:51 AM

In my experience, it's only the repugnant nasty end of nationalism that get excited over flags.

Not much point in getting assertive over identity when in England, it hasn't been successfully challenged for almost a thousand years....

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 02:38 AM

The general concensus is that if Scotland leaves what remains of the UK will be the remaining successor state and Scotland will be the new state. No-one of significance in the Yes camp argues other than that so Musket is right on that one.

dJust as the UK gvt supposedly has no contingency plans in place for a Yes vote I think it is true that the UK public haven't thought about the aftermath either. Basically it has been head in the sand stuff imagining it simply couldn't happen. Even though it now looks extremely close.

The rUK would be the successor state but what would it call itself? I suppose it could leave the name unchanged - though it wouldn't be that logical to do so. When Ireland as a single political entity ceased to exist then the UK changed its name to the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". So if Scotland leaves politically Great Britain will no longer exist. Geographically only a part of GB would be wtihin the UK. It could still be used but it wouldn't be logical to do so! South Britain doesn't have much of a ring to it so I suppose the "United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland" would be the most logical and least confusing for others.

What about the flag? Again probably stay as it is but again not very logical. Three crosses on the flag one representing a country that is no longer in the union whilst one of the countries within the union isn't represented on the flag!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 02:18 AM

Tattie Bogle I've got to completely disagree with you there re the campaign nastiness. On the whole the debate is remarkably civilised and completely peaceful. Yes the unionist media rants on about cyber-nats but really the eejits in the net are on both sides. Try going on to a Better Together FB page or the like and giving a different opinon!! The facts are that whatever the subject is people can be abusive on places like Youtube etc and this debate is no different. In the real world people on the whole are fine with opposing arguments and the thing about any nasty incidents is surely that they are so rare? The media went overboard over Jim Murphy having an egg thrown at him but that is hardly the end of civilisation as we know it. Incidents of violence have been very rare and largely ignored, or at least kept in the small print by the media because the most significant have been perpretated by the No side. A political speaker for the Britannica Party in Glasgow knocked a female heckler to the ground and kicked her with reports suggesting she was pregnant though that isn't clear whilst in Edinburgh Yes campaigners were attacked by a mob outside Tynecastle stadium. In truth both of these incidents can't even be laid at the door of the referendum. Violence can happen where there are right wing extremist groups campaigning and outside of football matches. So it'd be unfair to tar the No campaign with the blame - just as it is obviously unfair to blame Yes for one guy throwing an egg or eejits on Braveheart clips on Youtube.

The media has been a disgrace though. Had it been Cameron and Darling who'd received death threats rather than Salmond and Sturgeon then it'd have been all over the media. Likewise had police intervention been needed because a tailgater was shadowing Cameron's car rather than Salmond's then it'd be splashed over the front pages.

The worry I have is over the forthcoming massive Orange March which is to be held in Edinburgh in support of the union. If there is trouble at that then no doubt the UK media will lay the blame squarely at the door of the referendum debate - when we all know in Scotland that there is a long history of trouble at such events. I think we can on the whole be pretty proud of how the public have held themselves during this referendum. It's the unrelated simmering sectariansim that we still beed to be a bot ashamed about.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 08:32 PM

It kinda looks like the Quebec, Canada vote for independence in 1995, to which it has been compared.

While it was squeekly close, polls putting the separatists in thevlead to theblast moment, the federalists won by very small numbers. The popularity of separation has diminished since that loss, but is always on the horizon.

Since that time, many of the leaders of the separatist mivement have commented on the "goings on" inside. It turns out that they were very poorly prepared for what would occur in the aftermath-which could have resulted in disaster afterward, if they won.

The other revealing information is that a healthy number of those who voted for separationm were doing so more to put pressure on the Canadian government to offer a better economic deal for continuing to remain in the confederation. There was also an erroronious belief that after separation, they would continue to benefit from the Canadian dollar and economy.

While the situation may be different, one can never safely assume that all people have the same understanding, nor patriotic goals, in these matters.


.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 07:33 PM

First poll ever to show the "YES" for independence vote in the lead.

51% YES.....49% NO......You Gov Sunday Times.

The momentum is certainly with us, keep you're fingers crossed America, we are about to follow you.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 03:28 AM

No Kevin. Read the enabling legislation. In order for The UK to cease to exist, you need a referendum. This is about a few counties leaving The UK, not ending The UK.

The UK exists, even if it is smaller. There will be a UK within Great Britain even if the island of Great Britain has another country within it.

Ireland is an island but contains two countries. Great Britain is an island.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Silas
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 03:13 AM

Am I the only person who does not give a fuck either way?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 08:08 PM

True enough, even if there's a referendum victory for YES, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will have a temporary continued existence while the details are negotiated - but the outcome of the negotiations would be settled by the referendum, so far as concerns the matter of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.