BS: scottish independence

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 25 Sep 14 - 08:22 AM

To be honest I wasn't that bothered about Scottish Independence one way or the other (chances of me ever going there is quite remote as I am not a lover of cold weather)except for the fact that it has caused ripples and discomfort at Westminster. As far as I am concerned politicians have needed a kick up the backside for a while now. It has been a good thing to bring it home to all the parties concerned that not all people in the UK are happy. Even if the 'Yes' votes haven't won it is still a big voice of disgruntled people to take into account let's hope Cameron keeps to any promises that he has made, although I doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 24 Sep 14 - 03:47 PM

If the idiots rattling on about being duped are representative of the yes voters, which of course they aren't* then they have a low opinion of the intelligence of the majority of voters in Scotland and deserve to be marginalised and ignored by normal people anyway. They certainly don't know fuck all about Scotland nor its people despite their pretence otherwise.



* There is one in every village. Scotland seems to have a commune of the sad sods.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 24 Sep 14 - 02:43 PM

Hi

IMHO many of the potential NO voters were swayed over the to YES by the appearance of " The Three Stooges".

Cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Sep 14 - 05:25 AM

"the 'No' camp is insisting that they keep these, no less than the Yes side are"

As far as I can see Howard nobody in the NO camp are really all that fussed about "additional powers" and if the YES side shut up about them there wouldn't be a murmur.

Your additional power "bribe" came on the 16th September the referendum was on the 18th September if you check there was no "effect" whatsoever.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Johnny J
Date: 24 Sep 14 - 05:12 AM

Just last week, Yes campaigners were extremely jubilant and boasting that victory was in sight. They "poo pooed" the so called scare stories of the No campaign and the late hour offer of extra powers saying then that it would have no benefit for their opponents and actually drive even more people over to the Yes side.

Now that they have lost, they are now blaming the No side for scaremongering and attempting to bribe the electorate. This "wot swung it" they bleat but they didn't say this would be the case the week before and the negative campaigning by Better Together was always stated to be one of the reasons why Yes support was so high. Now, we're expected to swallow the notion that all Yes voters did so as they supported Independence as an ideal and were all committed to the cause.

Of course, The Yes campaign also continually tried to bribe the electorate throughout with promises which could not be guaranteed i.e. more childcare, no more wars, Tory free Scotland and so on. They also spread their own fear stories re The NHS and so so on.

Further, they exploited the fact that many poorer people who wished to be rid of the Tory Gov and had temporarily lost faith with Labour felt that they had little to lose and encouraged them to vote Yes.

However, these voters didn't necessarily support Independence either but just hoped that "their lot" could be improved some way of other.
If, and I realise it's a "big IF", we do get the promised extra powers and these prove to be adequate, many of these disaffected voters will no longer worry about Independence and all this extra "YES" support will soon melt like snow off a dyke.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 24 Sep 14 - 05:04 AM

All the UK parties had to pile in with promises of further devolution and the 'No' camp is insisting that they keep these, no less than the Yes side are.

Teribus, I don't question that many No voters had already made up their minds, nevertheless these promises do seem to have swayed some. Would the Nos have won so convincingly without these promises? Scotland's vote to remain appears to be conditional.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Sep 14 - 04:47 AM

"and it appears at least some of the No voters will have to be bribed to remain"

What is your basis for that assumption? The vast majority of those who voted NO had you asked them the instant the referendum question came up would have told you that they:

A: Never wanted a referendum in the first place
B: Fully intended to Vote NO

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 05:11 PM

Even when they rattle on about Salmond's "reprehensible conduct" they confuse him with those of us who understand and respect the Scottish people and their democratic wish.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: selby
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:55 PM

Was it not agreed by Alex Salmond and David Cameron that the referendum was a straight majority even if that figure was one.

Each thought he could win with this deal and it went to the wire.

So why does no one from the Yes camp want to build a better Scotland?

Why does no one from the yes camp feel pleased that they have given their English Welsh and N Irish brothers hope?

What does the yes camp continue to behave like petulant children rather than Adults with a brighter future than at the moment the rest of the UK

Keith

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,gutcher
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:48 PM

Apology accepted Mikel 2

Have become so used to lies and rat like squirmings from an obvious source that I may have been inclined to take a jaundiced view of other posts appearing to uphold his reprehensible conduct.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:43 PM

A Scottish neighbor (he came over long ago) said that the Scots have become too "Britified" to vote for independence.

As a Canadian, I shouldn't comment, but the vote seems to have supported his view.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 02:42 PM

I think from his comments over credentials of other people, he is slightly unhinged anyway. Incidentally, the areas he speaks of are also controlled by the parliament in Edinburgh. Perhaps he might ask his clever friends what that means.

Scotland is part of The UK. Currency is safe, jobs in defence, oil and banking are safe so the parliament in Scotland can now concentrate on providing a sustainable future for its people, using the devolved powers they have. Some of which they don't use, preferring to blame others for situations within their power to address.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 02:32 PM

Hi Guest Gutcher

I did not mean my comment about the spelling mistake to be taken seriously. It was meant to be a friendly joke.

I am sorry that you did not take it that way.

Cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 02:15 PM

""I think the time may come when there is a clear majority support for independence""

Possibly, given time, Scotland may be like Quebec-where the topic of separation never goes away, but support has deminished over time? (Though, it could resurface again, under a different climate).

In Quebec, where the population mostly speaks a different language than the rest of Canada, separation from Canada is now estimated to be at an all time low (over 44 years) -below 40 percent. This number is down from the 49.4 percent vote for separation in the 1995 referendum. The reason, according to most who do attitude surveys on the topic, is "sovereigntists are getting older and dying, or giving up on splitting from therest of Canada. There is low renewed support for sovereignty to replace them among the younger generation, who currently focus more on economic issues, versus the language, culture and constitutional issues that turned many strongly towards separation many years ago.

Could the situation evolve differently in Scotland? Well, yes-especially if the central UK government does not heed the recent messages given by the Scottish citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 10:30 AM

Teribus, I agree the result of this referundum was convincing. On the other hand 45% of Scots wanted to leave, and it appears at least some of the No voters will have to be bribed to remain. At best, the vote to stay in the Union was conditional.

I think the time may come when there is a clear majority support for independence. I don't have a particular figure in mind, although in some countries a 2/3 majority is required for changes to the constitution. However if there were a convincing majority in favour I don't see how the UK government could ignore it. In those circumstances it would be better to negotiate first and then vote on the outcome.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,gutcher
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 10:04 AM

Cognizance must be made of the fact that the voting system set up for election to the Scottish Parliament was meant to ensure that no party could have an overall majority in that Assembly.
Scottish Labour, if there be such a beast, have never recovered from their defeat in the 2011 election and the events of last week when five areas,at the very heart of their support, voted YES must be giving them much to think about at their current conference.
These five areas contain some of the worst areas of deprivation in Europe. this despite some of them having been controlled by Labour Councils for over Seventy Years.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 08:32 AM

"If a Scottish government could gain an irresistible mandate to negotiate independence then I think it would have to happen." - Howard Jones

Now what would in your mind constitute "an irresistible mandate" - like winning an election on their flagship policy of "An Independent Scotland" - If so they got that in the 2011 Scottish Parliamentary Elections the only trouble with that is that less than 45% of the electorate turned out to vote so that the SNP Government was elected by less than 21% of the electorate - In 2011 more of the people who turned out to vote voted to keep the SNP out than voted to get the SNP in - so hardly what anyone could describe as having "an irresistible mandate"

Future attempts at destroying the United Kingdom of Great britain and Northern Ireland should meet the criteria that the people of any one of the constituent countries must vote in a referendum to establish whether or not THEY want a referendum IT SHOULD NOT BE LEFT TO THE AGENDA OF A SINGLE POLITICAL PARTY. Population of Scotland 5.3 million, electorate of Scotland ~4 million v SNP voters ~0.9 million, SNP members 45,000

Here Howard is the voice of the electorate of Scotland on independence as of 18th September 2014:

2,001,926 voted NO to independence
1,617,989 voted YES to independence

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 08:24 AM

""Nothing is inevitable in politics""
Michael Ignatieff

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 08:21 AM

I suppose Stalin sat wondering if democracy helped him work out what is good for people before dismissing it as not giving him the answers.

Whilst the disillusioned idiots here carry on thinking people don't know what's good for them, the population of Scotland is waiting to see how the future holds now their status as part of The UK is confirmed.

As Salmond says Scotland is so rich, I look forward to the rest of us sharing the riches. However, the reality being different, I suppose more of my taxes will drift North.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,gutcher
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 08:16 AM

Mikel 2. I made no claim to any academic prowess. The people mentioned are all personal friends two of whom I visit at their homes, my friend the American Professor being an exception he visiting my home on his annual visits to these parts.
If a spelling mistake of one letter is the best you can come up with you are easily amused and pretty shallow forbye.

To get back to that snivelling worm the pathological liar, take his post of 22.9.01.12.

"Amazing how conspiracy theorists try to claim some moral high ground and then reel of credentials"

In this thread I have pointed out that all the media, written and broadcast, with the exception of the BBC, clearly showed and stated who were the thugs, wrapped in the union flag in George Square, does this constitute a conspiracy theory, I think not and am sure that all who read and viewed these reports will agree with me.

PS--I understand that a spelling check is available on this machine. As one whose first language is not English, how do I access this function.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 08:02 AM

Although I will be sorry to see it happen, I do think that independence will eventually come. The biggest problem with this referendum was, to use use the marriage metaphor, one partner walking out of the door with nowhere to go. It was the uncertainty, coupled with Salmond's whitewashing of the crucial political and practical difficulties, that I think persuaded many to vote with the head, perhaps even if the heart said otherwise.

If a Scottish government could gain an irresistible mandate to negotiate independence then I think it would have to happen. The difficulties would have to be negotiated and thrashed out, and only then presented in a referendum so that people would know what they were actually voting for. Only in those circumstances do I think that independence might be obtained, and have a chance of working.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 07:11 AM

SNP membership is now standing at almost 45,000 just higher than Liberal membership figures for the whole of the UK!!

More than doubling in under one week......I reckon the penny has dropped, don't you ?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 05:31 AM

Presumably they will change the name of their party soon. Scotland rejected nationalism quite emphatically.

As I said. The day to day running of the country, if they weren't so incompetent at it is commendable. SNP are a liberal, inclusive, equality focused party who mean well for all. Even Salmond, for all his misty eyed history inspired nonsense has been a champion of minorities, pushed through legislation that puts all residents on an equal footing and was comfortable with being portrayed as a liberal.

My holiday lets.. Funny you should mention them. A surge in bookings since Friday. Seriously. From Easter to October next year, seven cottages have no free weeks at all. For the twelve months to end September 2015, I had 42% occupancy overall this time last week, and over the weekend and yesterday, that has risen to 69% overall. I need to book a couple of weeks in Kingussie quick before they are all taken.

No. I don't worry about my property portfolio. Holiday lets and student digs only in Scotland. Two markets that will never do too badly. I notice one of the holiday cottage agencies they are registered with has emailed past customers in The Netherlands saying the result means they can book their next holiday with confidence.

I thought that was rather funny..

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:57 AM

"Mr Salmond {wistful dreamer & erstwhile charismatic dangerous fool.} remarked that the referendum was a triumph for the democratic process and participation in politics, calling 'on all of Scotland to follow suit in accepting the democratic verdict of the people of Scotland.' The First Minister finished his speech saying: 'We shall go forward as one nation"

That was on Friday the 19th September

Before the week-end was over this complete and utter waste of space was muttering about Scotland declaring UDI - God this man Salmond is a national embarrassment.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:43 AM

The "dream", is no longer a dream.

SNP membership had doubled by over 20,000 since 18th of September.
The genie is out of the bottle, our young folk are incensed by the lies of Westminster and the hypocrisy of so called socialists and conservative parties banding together to subjugate one small country and deny it self determination.

Its only a matter of time now......Mr Salmond will not be leaving the stage, he will make mincemeat of the dithering liars and further boost SNP power in the next election.

This is one issue which will never "go away", no matter how much you would like it to, Ian.   However I suppose you worry about your property portfolio from down in the South?   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:17 AM

The problem is, you can't have Mel Gibson have the last word on account of the fact the good people of Scotland have made it clear they are British and wish to remain so.

Serial poster? Sounds like someone complaining when bullshit is confronted. Perhaps our little people who don't like democracy can shut up, then this thread can slink into obscurity along with the wistful dreams of a charismatic dangerous fool.

🇬🇧

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 23 Sep 14 - 03:07 AM

yes, musket, i'm fairly sure he was saying you are one (of them)

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 04:13 PM

I thought you were going to say "I'm one."

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 02:32 PM

There are a couple of serial posters on this thread who are no more than petty, pompous agitators.
I'm out.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 02:28 PM

Hi

Guest Gutcher <" I could give at least three Edinburgh University Academics and one American Professor as guarantors for my verasity.">

Great - don't you think it's great that someone who has such academic claims but can't spell the word veracity??

You've got to admit even if it is a typo it is still amusing.

Cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 01:12 PM

Amazing how conspiracy theorists try to claim some moral high ground and then reel off credentials...

You flatter yourself. I started with your absurd conspiracy theory then went on to generalise. If you know any chair at Edinburgh, possibly an aquaintence if they get anywhere near the medical school. I give three lectures a year there myself, plus one at each of the local Royal Colleges.

So, what have we learned? Err.. Fuck all actually.
💤

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,gutcher
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 01:01 PM

Greetings all
As one who is not thirled to a computer keyboard please excuse the delay in replying to our sneering poster.
He makes the claim that most of the people on this forum are intelligent and then proceeds to spout a parcel of lies thus insulting that intelligence. I would normally treat his posts with the contempt they deserve, however in the interests of trueth his post of 21.9.14 at 2.15pm requires an answer.

At no point did I claim my journalist friend was a TV reporter although he has appeared on that medium, his various degrees include a 1st from Oxford. As an Ulsterman living in Scotland he has supported the No side in this referendum so any information emminating from him can be treated as correct. If I did not know the mindset of the poster from the tenor of his posts I could give at least three Edinburgh University Academics and one American Professor as guarantors for my verasity.

Again he claims I have gleaned my information in a "Pub". This will of course cause some amusement to those who know me as I am a complete teetotalier and could count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that I have been in a "Pub" during the past two years, these visits have been for musical purposes only.

Need I continue, this sneering, bullyboy, boastfull character should be treated with nothing but contempt.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 12:20 PM

Ah, but it wasn't a democratic vote. I'm in England and nobody asked me to vote on something affecting me, contrary to Article 41.2 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. There are Scots all over the world who didn't get a vote, whereas I am told illegal immigrants north on the border did.

The current proposals on the table about the English devolution right is equally unprincipled, insofar as the English MPs draft the Law but the Scottish ones still get to vote on it. See the discrepancy? Scotland still gets it both ways, England doesn't vote on kicking them out but they get to vote on our autonomy. How offensive is that?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,gutcher
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 11:40 AM

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 09:18 AM

What's all this about personal responsibility will come with independence?

Get someone to read a newspaper to you. Scotland wishes to remain an important section of The United Kingdom. Personal responsibility has been displayed in the decisive group responsibility in deciding economic and social stability has more to offer than some Mel Gibson charactature after too many cans of Special Brew.

So far as predictions go, I appear to have backed the right horse. No surprise there. I invest in Scotland as much for level headed pragmatism of business dealings there as I do for a kilt fetish.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 08:44 AM

""Personal responsibility" comes from a broad spectrum of sources and outcomes. Some folks work hard to maintain an illusion that they are immersed in such (and few others are). Combined with compassion, together they provide good building blocks for respecting others, including their perspectives, aspirations and life choices-whether they be similar or otherwise.

Children have narrow vision, which is replaced with a broader viewpoints as they mature. Where it doesn't provides furtile ground for anger, bitterness and intolerance -sometimes towards others who do not see things (and life choices) as they do, or choose lifestyles as they have.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 08:18 AM

Fine thoughtful response Mr T.
Personal responsibility will be one of the positives to come with independence.

Nae feer eh you and me bein' enemies Tattie, nae maiter how ye vote.
Too much watter unner the bridge.....eh?    :0)

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 07:08 AM

IMO, minimizing the meaning a democratic vote falls under the heading of "sore loser".

If one were to make a claim that a percentage of those voting "no" did not know what they doing, it is just as reasonable to assume that a similar number on the "yes" voted similarly. So, excluding both groups from the final results leaves one with the same majority vote of intelligent folks voting for the no side, for whatever reason was important to them.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 07:00 AM

Devo-max as it is worked out and delivered brings with it it's own set of responsibilities Ake.

Once these "additional powers" are doled out then it will be incumbent upon those third-rate wasters who sit in the Scottish Parliament to use them - the one thing they will not be able to do (As Jowly Eck & Co have done since 2007) is to sit back and heap all blame on "Westminster". To sort out problems in Scotland under these "additional powers" the party in Government may find itself having to face reality and actually order the cutting of services and increasing taxes which may make them unpopular - but there again Akenaton governing a country has never been about popularity it has always been about doing the right thing for the country as a whole - a thing modern day "professional politicians" seem increasingly incapable of doing - all they care about is getting elected and staying in power - and that does require "popularity" - doesn't do the country any good though.

The UDI thing is typical Alex Salmond bluster, poorly thought out, baseless, twaddle. The whole of the electorate of the British Isles will vote in the Referendum on the EU and believe me those wishing to escape the clutches of rule by the selected Commissioners of the EU, will not make the same mistakes that Salmond, Sturgeon, the SNP and the YES-Campaign made - they will do their homework and they will have detailed answers worked out to all the difficult questions their representative will asked.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 06:23 AM

Tattie Bogle has perhaps posted the best response I have seen yet, a few posts above.

Thank you sir.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 06:04 AM

A delay?

Force the Scottish people into something they rejected?

And here was me thinking we were debating with people who cared for Scotland and cared for its people, however misguided or ignorant they are...

You can't beat democracy. In fact quite a few British men fought and died to save Europe from attitudes such as yours and Akenaton's, thinking you know what is best for people. Akenaton even has his list of his idea of untermensch. Mainly gays, gypsies, liberals...

Listen to yourselves. If the Scottish people were as thick as you assumed they were, you would have said everybody has to respect the vote.

Respect it, and ask yourself why, instead of blaming Westminster for everything, many of the issues SNP raised have been in their power to address for a long time now. The Scottish parliament, not Westminster has made the situation idiots blame others for..

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 05:45 AM

Ah, but that was always the Scots way, not giving a tinker's toss about anyone else. Put all your egocentrics in one basket and what do you get? This refusal to cooperate or collaborate was the essence of Culloden, and they've not moved on significantly since.
It was the essence of the Yes case, presuming that RUK would give them everything they wanted (currency, pensions, NHS, you name it) just because they were so charming, believing in the Victorian myth. What Vickie was responsible for in her excessive romanticism, all the Germanic Christmas guff and Scottish Hogmanay BS. The thing I most resent the Yes bunch for is that we still have no excuse for getting rid of the JH Hootnanny at the end of the year - the rest can keep, I'd still vote Yes if we were given the same voice in the South. The pipes are fine instruments, but not in that context.
What did the Scots do before 1788, when Burns wrote that bloody poem? They spend the year knocking the shit out of each other and suddenly some twat stuffs something mawkish and false down everyone's throats suggesting we love each other after all. It's about the same time as the GHB appears on the scene - what were they thinking of? The 1746 Dress Act banning the wearing of highland dress and tartan had been repealed in 1782, and perhaps Burns was trying to appeal to the Jacobite spirit - in which case, stop trying to ram treason down English throats more than 350 years after we discovered the Union was il-advised. The Stuarts took a bare 40 years to make themselves and their Scotish brethren unwelcome at the start of the 17th Century, and are still playing the same con games 400 years later.
This surely was the reason the English weren't allowed a vote either - we'd probably have voted far more heavily to separate, according to the figures we now see.
When the only reason to stay together is a fiction, then it's a sad state of affairs. This is of course the problem Cameron and company have just discovered, the wheels just fell off the fabulation, England wants fair treatment. This time, I think UKIP just might be able to break through: the essence of the problem was generated by NuLab, acting without a sense of consequences, and Cameron has just scored zero for picking up the pieces afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 05:34 AM

"Huns" is an abusive sectarian term for Protestants, originating in Northern Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 05:31 AM

There are absolutely NO statistics to prove that the late promises, or "The Vow" persuaded people to vote No. Many who voted either way made their minds up months in advance of the polling date, and had posted their votes well before all the events of the final week, so could not be influenced by all that rhetoric. I think it was approx 20% of voters had a postal vote.
Sure, there was a poll (a sample, who's to say if it was representative?) showing a largish percentage of people were still undecided only a week or so before the vote. But there is still NO sound statistical proof that the activities of Cameron, Darling and Brown drove people into the No camp: one could equally argue that it was their activities, or the later speeches of Salmond and Sturgeon persuaded people to vote Yes.......or it might just have been down to whoever had the best sales pitch at the polling station. ("Every time Cameron opens his mouth, it's another yes vote" was a popular belief"!)

The whole campaign has been beset by false claims on both sides, and these now continue in the aftermath. And now they have the cheek to blame the over-65s No voters: we ALL have loose screws, lost marbles, advancing dementia, according to some sources.
It has been a wake-up call for Westminster, so let's keep up the pressure for change. And let's not lose friends over it.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Patrick
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 04:35 AM

This is only a delay on the road to Independence, taking a similar route to devolution., one mighty step forward, waiting for Westminster to default and then surging onwards. By 2020 Scotland will be independent, if not sooner.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 03:45 AM

If a clear majority of The UK votes anything, there is nothing constitutionally difficult. Scotland has made it perfectly clear that it is a brick in the UK wall.

That said, the clear message that small is not the way forward will possibly send a message in itself to the eurosceptics. I sincerely hope so. Just the possibility of the few counties in the extreme north of our country buggering off caused markets to fall so the thought of leaving our major trading partners could do irreparable harm.

Scotland has always had a sectarian undertone in some areas and this is being replaced temporarily by Salmond's diversion. I just hope he is proud. He has already showed himself to be a sore loser.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 03:09 AM

Come on Teribus, who said any thing about flames and bombs? There are many quiet and peaceful ways of "resisting".

I am sure you agree that the promise of what amounts to devo-max, influenced many to vote NO late in the day......If Cameron is about to backtrack on this promise, it could bring the way the result was achieved into dispute.

I am personally against membership of the present EU, and don't think it coincides with real independence, but if the UK decides to leave next year, against the wishes of the majority of Scottish voters, that would certainly open up constitutional problems.

Regarding Unionist thugs, there is a layer of "Unionism" in Scotland which is extremely unhealthy.....The Queen and the "flag" have always been the insignia of a large anti Catholic, Unionist minority.

There is where you must look for your "flames and bombs" Mr T....and I will be right beside you to stamp them out.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 02:46 AM

The true voice of a nation is, by definition the majority of those living in it.

The United Kingdom owns the Saltaire, some of our less savoury contributors seem to have replaced it with satire.

Two million unionist thugs eh? Ooh dearie me. They'll have you wearing a tartan star on your coat next eh?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Sep 14 - 02:11 AM

Akenaton - "Get ready to resist"

Akenaton - "Scotland going for UDI if the UK leaves the EU"

So much for your respect for the democratically demonstrated voice of the electorate of Scotland Ake - remember the ones who voted and who you said on this thread you'd listen to and abide by their decision? - They voted NO to independence - live with it.

Scotland settles it's differences quietly and peacefully - there are some here who would apparently love to fan the flames and see things played out as they are elsewhere with terrorist attacks and bombs - ain't going to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 21 Sep 14 - 08:38 PM

What did amuse me was Salmond quoting from Scott's Bonnie Dundee as his future course. You can just see him on a warhorse galloping out of the West Gate on the way to the Airport...
That's the problem with quoting from the Victorian romantics, they miss some important bits out - like John Graham being not just the first Jacobite leader, but also and foremost a firm and unbudging Tory. The song refers to an incident of 18th March 1689, which was soon followed by letters from him protesting that he was living peaceably at home and not in revolt. The rest of Claverhouse' tale was being chased around Scotland until he was able to face the Orange troops at Killiekrankie, where he met his end, within the year.
So if that's Salmond's expectations, well then, Cameron will be well satisfied, I would think.