Indy Ref

by **Notch** Wed 17 Sep 2014, 10:09 pm

George Carlin wrote: v
Let me start this off, then. I have printed and read all literature which either side has published on this debate over the past 2 years (including the main policy papers from the SNP and from Better Together/UK Treasury and the Wee Blue Book).

If I had the chance, I would think hard about it, but ultimately I think that I would vote 'no'.

It seems to me, with my pea brain, that:

1. As a professional economist, Alex Salmond has had his entire political and professional life to make a waterproof financial case for an independent Scotland. Provided that there isn't something I've missed, I cannot see that he has done so. How can we still be fishing for answers to very fundemental questions so close to the actual voting date? Surely if it was the case that Scotland had a solid long term financial future, there would be a far greater volume of published consensus? If the financial case for independence cannot be clearly and verifiably made (without optimistic financial projects which strain credulity), then this is where this debate begins and ends for me. What do we tell our kids otherwise?

2. I entirely understand and appreciate that stepping into the unknown cannot in itself be a reason to say 'no'. You cannot have opportunity without risk. However, is anyone else disappointed with the quality of verifiable information that has been made available to us throughout this entire debate? Whilst I don't expect all answers to all questions, surely it is better to err on the side of caution until such time as policy can be firmly established.

If this was a trial, the verdict would be 'not proven'.

What I don't believe is if Scotland votes no, the chance to do so again would be lost forever. I think that we may see another vote on this topic within a generation (20 years) if a 'no' vote does not have a clear majority amongst Scottish people. I would be happy with that.

Discuss. For the love of feck, please be nice.

by ME-109 Wed 17 Sep 2014, 10:19 pm

Jeez Notch took me back to my Leaving Cert with Ozymandias....bad memories....

I think that even with a No vote tomorrow the UK has been set down a path with an interesting future. Certainly Scotland is going to go its own way eventually..i think the whole ref campaign has made it inevitable.

by SecretFly Wed 17 Sep 2014, 10:35 pm

........................ another Irish guy joins the Scottish Referendum New Thread............... Whistle

This is kinda embarrassing....

BTW............... won't an Independent Scotland still be 'British'? I hear some guy on Channel 4 say that the Independent Scotland would miss out on being part of Britain in sporting terms.

But Britain is the island's name.... not the UK's property.

by ME-109 Wed 17 Sep 2014, 10:39 pm

Start a new topic why dont you Cool

by SecretFly Wed 17 Sep 2014, 10:43 pm

If Scotland votes for independence they'll have betrayed two tombstones in France

???

And what about the joined tombstones of English, French, American soldiers who also fought together

Oh here's Hastings!!!!!

by quinsforever Wed 17 Sep 2014, 11:02 pm

at the olympic we compete as GB. there are far more important issues, but regarding sport a YES would be very bad for Scotland's chances of getting medals at Olympic type sports. its not just the lost lottery funding. its also the access to elite training centres across England for GB athletes/

by Gibson Wed 17 Sep 2014, 11:16 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqgkZDbe4Xk

by Sin é Wed 17 Sep 2014, 11:23 pm

quinsforever wrote:at the olympic we compete as GB. there are far more important issues, but regarding sport a YES would be very bad for Scotland's chances of getting medals at Olympic type sports. its not just the lost lottery funding. its also the access to elite training centres across England for GB athletes/

Crafty English not having any elite training centres in Scotland Rolling Eyes

You think Scotland won't have a lottery .... would that be on religious grounds or what?

by SecretFly Wed 17 Sep 2014, 11:29 pm

quinsforever wrote:at the olympic we compete as GB. there are far more important issues, but regarding sport a YES would be very bad for Scotland's chances of getting medals at Olympic type sports. its not just the lost lottery funding. its also the access to elite training centres across England for GB athletes/

Statistically its the new voting poor people of Scotland that buy most lotto tickets Wink

It's England's loss. The post YES vote jackpots will maybe reach 500,000 bucks on a good week.

by quinsforever Wed 17 Sep 2014, 11:50 pm

jeesus. you guys are relentless.

how many medal at olympics does ireland get.

GB has one of the most successful elite sport development programs in the world. everyone is attempting to copy it. Of course Scots athletes are terrified of a YES vote.

Scotland could choose to have a lottery. awesome. the problem is the cost of accessing an elite program comparable with rUK's which has 10x the population. which sports do they choose to focus on with 1/10th of the budget?

the point is absolutely incontrovertible.

by Feckless Rogue Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:11 am

I predict a no vote. I reckon some people have been telling pollsters yes because that's what they want people to think they'd do because it's more fashionable. Like in '92. But they'll get into the polling booth and take the safe/sensible option, despite not liking Westminster (something they'd have in common with a lot of English people outside London).

Does anyone else think this is the most spectacular manifestation of widespread dissilusionment with the choices they have on offer in their democracy all over not just Britain but Europe. UKIP in England, Sinn Fein in Ireland, far right and left gaining all over Europe and the traditional center parties draining members and votes.

I reckon that by the end of the 80's the left had pretty much won the argument on social issues and the right won the argument on economic issues and for a couple of decades all the main parties have been offering the same thing. I reckon everybody is getting bloody pished off that their votes don't make any difference, and surprising things are gonna start happening in politics over the next 10 years, not all good.

by quinsforever Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:20 am

feckless, i couldnt agree more.

scotland almost (or maybe they do) getting a YES is no different from rUK's frustration with the EU.

in an era of completely open borders, people are going to search harder for their own cultural identity. its just inevitable. and those that assert it politically will gain a following.

by Sin é Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:21 am

quinsforever wrote:jeesus. you guys are relentless.

how many medal at olympics does ireland get.

GB has one of the most successful elite sport development programs in the world. everyone is attempting to copy it. Of course Scots athletes are terrified of a YES vote.

Scotland could choose to have a lottery. awesome. the problem is the cost of accessing an elite program comparable with rUK's which has 10x the population. which sports do they choose to focus on with 1/10th of the budget?

the point is absolutely incontrovertible.

Yep, relentless. We stuck at it for 800 years Very Happy

Ireland doesn't have that many medals - but we still have more than Scotland!

Quins - the facilities required are proportional to the much smaller than England population. For instance, England may need to build 10 facilities for its athletes, Scotland would only need 2.

I would say the Australians are the most successful at developing sports people per head of population.

by Sin é Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:27 am

Feckless, the politicians couldn't deliver on any promises they have made because of the credit crunch.

Its great to see young people in Scotland so engaged though in this referendum. The genie is out of the bottle though with regard to Scotland. Unless there is a resounding No vote (60%+ NO), there will be great uncertainty with the UK and how long it will stay together. If its 55/45 NO, then there will be another referendum within the next 5-10 years and they will vote Yes.

by quinsforever Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:50 am

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:jeesus. you guys are relentless.

how many medal at olympics does ireland get.

GB has one of the most successful elite sport development programs in the world. everyone is attempting to copy it. Of course Scots athletes are terrified of a YES vote.

Scotland could choose to have a lottery. awesome. the problem is the cost of accessing an elite program comparable with rUK's which has 10x the population. which sports do they choose to focus on with 1/10th of the budget?

the point is absolutely incontrovertible.

Yep, relentless. We stuck at it for 800 years
Ireland doesn't have that many medals - but we still have more than Scotland!

Quins - the facilities required are proportional to the much smaller than England population. For instance, England may need to build 10 facilities for its athletes, Scotland would only need 2.

I would say the Australians are the most successful at developing sports people per head of population.

wrong again sin e. these centres of excellence are each for a separate sport. so nothing proportional about it at all. and its 10:1 just to correct your population maths.

and if you want to enter athletes in all the same disciplines as GB you need the same number of centres of "excellence". or, as i said, you have to be very, very selective about where you think you can be competitive.

you cant argue this. even the scots athletes arent attempting to argue this. please dont embarrass yourself by attempting to argue this.

by quinsforever Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:56 am

Sin é wrote:Feckless, the politicians couldn't deliver on any promises they have made because of the credit crunch.

Its great to see young people in Scotland so engaged though in this referendum. The genie is out of the bottle though with regard to Scotland. Unless there is a resounding No vote (60%+ NO), there will be great uncertainty with the UK and how long it will stay together. If its 55/45 NO, then there will be another referendum within the next 5-10 years and they will vote Yes.

you talk such rubbish its comical. the youth of scotland, contrary to expectations, are firm NO voters. they have the time and educational resources on hand to actually think about what it means. Gutting for Salmond that if he hadnt pushed for votes for 16/17 years olds he would probably be sitting on a comfortable YES win.

i wish the Scots would go. i am fed up with being blamed for anything. I hope it works awesomely for them on a surge of optimism, entrepreneurialism and opportuniy. but grow up and stop trusting politicians who tell you that you will get to use sterling, not have any debt, have all the oil etc. The Braveheart speech almost worked this time. next time its going to be all about the economics. as it should be.

by Sin é Thu 18 Sep 2014, 1:10 am

quinsforever wrote:
wrong again sin e. these centres of excellence are each for a separate sport. so nothing proportional about it at all. and its 10:1 just to correct your population maths.

and if you want to enter athletes in all the same disciplines as GB you need the same number of centres of "excellence". or, as i said, you have to be very, very selective about where you think you can be competitive.

you cant argue this. even the scots athletes arent attempting to argue this. please dont embarrass yourself by attempting to argue this.

So what is spectacular about these centres of excellence then? What facilities would swimmers need other than good coaches & a 50 metre pool?

Or say, athletes - they probably would be better off training in some place where the weather is better (or get an athletics scholarship to US university). Most important thing though is the coaching and having athletes of sufficient standard. Even the England centres of excellent will not make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

by Sin é Thu 18 Sep 2014, 1:15 am

quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:Feckless, the politicians couldn't deliver on any promises they have made because of the credit crunch.

Its great to see young people in Scotland so engaged though in this referendum. The genie is out of the bottle though with regard to Scotland. Unless there is a resounding No vote (60%+ NO), there will be great uncertainty with the UK and how long it will stay together. If its 55/45 NO, then there will be another referendum within the next 5-10 years and they will vote Yes.
you talk such rubbish its comical. the youth of scotland, contrary to expectations, are firm NO voters. they have the time and educational resources on hand to actually think about what it means. Gutting for Salmond that if he hadnt pushed for votes for 16/17 years olds he would probably be sitting on a comfortable YES win.

i wish the Scots would go. i am fed up with being blamed for anything. I hope it works awesomely for them on a surge of optimism, entrepreneurialism and opportuniy. but grow up and stop trusting politicians who tell you that you will get to use sterling, not have any debt, have all the oil etc. The Braveheart speech almost worked this time. next time its going to be all about the economics. as it should be.

I made the comment ''Its great to see young people in Scotland so engaged though in this referendum.'' I didn't mention what way they were going to vote.

by LordDowlais Thu 18 Sep 2014, 8:49 am

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
wrong again sin e. these centres of excellence are each for a separate sport. so nothing proportional about it at all. and its 10:1 just to correct your population maths.

and if you want to enter athletes in all the same disciplines as GB you need the same number of centres of "excellence". or, as i said, you have to be very, very selective about where you think you can be competitive.

you cant argue this. even the scots athletes arent attempting to argue this. please dont embarrass yourself by attempting to argue this.

So what is spectacular about these centres of excellence then? What facilities would swimmers need other than good coaches & a 50 metre pool?

Or say, athletes - they probably would be better off training in some place where the weather is better (or get an athletics scholarship to US university). Most important thing though is the coaching and having athletes of sufficient standard. Even the England centres of excellent will not make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Well the actual athletes need funding for a start, so do the coaches, it's not like just saying, well here's your pool and I am going to see if you can swim back and forth quicker each day. These athletes need to be training instead of working, they need the money to suppliment this, they get that now with the UK government and lottery funding. O.k Scotland can have a lottery, but how many of the 5million people will play it, and how much will be left over after prize money, with three quarters of 65million people playing it, you get a lot more to spread around.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 9:18 am

As Quins himself said................. I think most Scottish people will be voting on more serious concerns than sports medals when they say YES or NO today.

But I think it's time we respected that voting has begun and let them at it - as regards YES or NO - without any more direct allusions to their specific circumstances. We've done the electioneering - now let's leave them in peace to vote.

So that kinda leaves only Feckless's more generalised political questions to play with........................

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.............. I'm thinking Feckless, I'mthinking. Give me time! My mind is groggy in the morning!

by Jimpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 9:22 am

quinsforever wrote:at the olympic we compete as GB. there are far more important issues, but regarding sport a YES would be very bad for Scotland's chances of getting medals at Olympic type sports. its not just the lost lottery funding. its also the access to elite training centres across England for GB athletes/

Why would that be the case. How would a Scottish athlete training in England be any different to - for example mo Farrah training in Mexico? Athletes pay for the privilidge of using training facilities wherever they may be, there's no reason why that could not still be the case, especially when you consider that a lot of the facilities in England were paid for by the tax payer/lottery funding which is a UK concern.

by Scrumpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 9:31 am

I guess this time tomorrow morning England will be celebrating Bubbly

At long last will have a chance of being an independent country one that won't have to fund the Bitter Jocks north of the border ( Braveheart

) at the expense of the equally hard working people in the North, South, East and West of England. (Just need rid of the Welsh and NI)

Roll on the 19th Sept so we can all move on.

Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George! Yahoo

by quinsforever Thu 18 Sep 2014, 9:47 am

Jimpy wrote:
quinsforever wrote:at the olympic we compete as GB. there are far more important issues, but regarding sport a YES would be very bad for Scotland's chances of getting medals at Olympic type sports. its not just the lost lottery funding. its also the access to elite training centres across England for GB athletes/

Why would that be the case. How would a Scottish athlete training in England be any different to - for example mo Farrah training in Mexico? Athletes pay for the privilidge of using training facilities wherever they may be, there's no reason why that could not still be the case, especially when you consider that a lot of the facilities in England were paid for by the tax payer/lottery funding which is a UK concern.

Mo Farrah trains with a private coach. Not with the US National team coach. alberto salazar i believe.

overseas athletes dont get to train and use the UK Sport setup. they can maybe train individually with specific athletes, but overseas athletes wont get access to the coaching, nutritionists, physios, sports science analytics, etc, etc.

look at what Brailsford did with GB cycling. Its all about massive attention to details and incredible analytics, discipline and hard work with a big team of experts supporting the athletes. No overseas players got any of that action as it was funded by UK Sport.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 9:55 am

It's all looking good for England in 2015. Space food and thermodynamically tested and approved titanium polymer, micro-impact-calibrated gumshields.

Exacting science will pull it off. I've been saying so for many months now. It's in the bag.

by quinsforever Thu 18 Sep 2014, 9:59 am

This is a good article on what will happen to the banks and mortgages in the event of a YES vote. Not pretty reading.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-17/what-happens-to-british-banks-if-scotland-votes-to-separate-q-a.html

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 10:04 am

Respect the vote Quins. The media are...let's join 'em. The campaigning is over.

by Jimpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 10:09 am

A “Brexit” is the vaguely annoying media term for Britain choosing to exit the EU. As one of the most Eurosceptic countries on the continent, there have been on-and-off rumblings of the UK parting from its mainland cousins for years. But a Scottish “Yes” vote could well tilt a Brexit from “possibility” to “certainty.

At the moment, Britain’s Prime Minister is a pro-EU Conservative. However, if Scotland chooses to go it alone today, there’s a chance his party may knife him in the back. Thanks to UKIP currently stealing votes from the Conservatives, whoever replaces Cameron will likely be as Eurosceptic as they come. Moreover, Labour party losing its 41 Scottish seats would significantly weaken the party’s prospects of gaining a majority. The result: a Britain that would go careering out the EU at the earliest opportunity.

Although it sounds abstract, the effects of a Brexit would be very real. In a flash, the EU would lose one of its largest economies. Along with the trade disruption that entails, it would severely reduce Europe’s clout on the international stage. The Financial Times also estimates that London’s financial district would be decimated, with possible knock-on effects for American and Swiss banks.

After over 300 years of union, the UK and Scottish economies are so closely tied as to be almost indivisible. Unfortunately for both countries, this means that a Scottish exit would be disruptive, messy, and possibly cause a gigantic economic crash.

According to the Telegraph, last week alone almost £2.3 billion was wiped off the value of Scottish businesses when a poll seemed to point to a “Yes” victory. In response, foreign banks have begun advising their clients to get their money out of the UK as fast as possible. Credit Suisse has warned that a recession is looking likely, and it’s expected that a breakup would cause the UK’s GDP to fall sharply. On September 9, 2014, the Independent newspaper revealed that billions were already being pulled by investors, causing the value of the pound to plummet.
Bad as things might be for rUK, things could be worse for Scotland. Paul Krugman has warned Scots to be “very afraid” of the economic fallout independence could bring.

The knock-on effects of rUK splitting from Europe could go way beyond the economic and into some very messy areas indeed. As Reuters has pointed out, a Brexit would essentially leave one country in control of the EU: Germany. With rUK gone and France in shambles, the continent would have no country capable of providing a balance to Berlin. And Germany is currently very unpopular in Europe. As one of the chief architects of the austerity that has devastated the continent’s south, it’s utterly loathed by many EU members. Faced with the choice of being de facto ruled by Berlin or going it alone, plenty of states may choose to jump ship.

The result would be a total disintegration of the world’s largest economy. Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, and possibly even France could all split off, abandoning the Euro and Schengen. While the Northern economies like Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark might choose to stick together, the shock of losing nearly all its major players would leave the EU severely weakened—if not outright irrelevant

This is not to mention the possible disintegration of Belgium, Spain and the likes of Kosovo, a more Federal rUK, the future of Northern Ireland and Wales.

by Scrumpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 10:12 am

It amazes me that Salmond has failed to answer a single question with a in depth answer and yet people still believe in him?

as for Sturgeon, does anyone else find her attractive? Erm

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 10:40 am

The only problem...the only problem with the EU - is the Parliament of the EU, the rules of the EU, the Foreign Policy of the EU, the President of the EU, the executive of the EU (Commissioners)

The only problem that makes the forecasts of total monetary and social meltdown more real is the totally cynical grip the EU increasingly takes for itself in GOVERNMENTAL terms.

The EU experiment worked the less the EU regarded itself as Lawmaker and Rights giver and the more it was simply a name given to a group of friendly states agreeing to trade with each other and help each other out and be good rersponsible neighbours.

That's all the EU/then EEC ever needed to be. But this gradual, clawing, sinister slide to Empire - an Empire by complex laws and crafty population spreads that would be increasingly difficult (and dangerous!) for individual nations to pull back from - is in my opinion the wrong journey for the EU. But it continues on that journey nevertheless, running counter to the very concerns of the peoples of the EU.

The disquiet about the EU, and where it seems to want to go, and what parts of it are pushing the agenda, is real. People sense it. You can't dampen it down and accuse people who sense it of being disruptive or being anti-EU. People sense it because the unease is coming from the only part of the EU that truly matters - the population. The populations of the member nations are not so certain the EU in its present set-up is the way they want it to go.

I say the populations are the only part of the EU that truly matters because the structures of the EU, the courts, the institutions, the parliament, the commission.... all those things can law make as much as they want, they can create EU ambitions as much as they want, they can talk of continued increasing Union as much as they want - but if the peoples of Europe react negatively to all that, it will crumble. None of the commands and dictats will mean anything. We all know what happens when a system fails - meltdown that can't be contained.

Therefore, in my opinion the most dangerous thing about Europe right now, the most negligent part of Europe right now - is a dictatorial EU, ruling from a smugness that is blind to the unease, runs in the face of such unease and largely tries to ignore the contrast between the goals of the EU machine and the goals of the peoples of Europe itself.

I think the most powerful reality in Europe right now, is that we want genuine friendships and mutual benefits throughout Europe, but we don't want the sovereign National powerlessness that seems to automatically come with it - by command of EU law.

Less law and commands - back to more emotional cooperation by choice

by whocares Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:16 am

quinsforever wrote:

GB has one of the most successful elite sport development programs in the world. everyone is attempting to copy it. Of course Scots athletes are terrified of a YES vote.

Scotland could choose to have a lottery. awesome. the problem is the cost of accessing an elite program comparable with rUK's which has 10x the population. which sports do they choose to focus on with 1/10th of the budget?

the point is absolutely incontrovertible.

really? for cyclism to a certain extent (dont think it's worth talking about minor elitist sports such as sailing and rowing here)... Scotland would still get 99.9% of team GB winter olympic medals thanks to curling though Smile

by lostinwales Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:30 am

Jimpy wrote:...

The result would be a total disintegration of the world’s largest economy. Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, and possibly even France could all split off, ....

Greece, Portugal and Spain should probably split away anyway. Given that their record of taxation is generally so poor the easiest and most efficient way of getting money to spend is just to print more of the stuff. But thats a whole different debate.

And I dont get the 'just because X% of a population dont like the way they are being governed change is inevitable' thing, given that, certainly in the UK, the actual margin between the votes at general elections tend to be small and liable to change, and yet we dont get revolutions.

Last thought, when do the SNP rename themselves SUKIP?

by Sin é Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:47 am

quinsforever wrote:
Jimpy wrote:
quinsforever wrote:at the olympic we compete as GB. there are far more important issues, but regarding sport a YES would be very bad for Scotland's chances of getting medals at Olympic type sports. its not just the lost lottery funding. its also the access to elite training centres across England for GB athletes/

Why would that be the case. How would a Scottish athlete training in England be any different to - for example mo Farrah training in Mexico? Athletes pay for the privilidge of using training facilities wherever they may be, there's no reason why that could not still be the case, especially when you consider that a lot of the facilities in England were paid for by the tax payer/lottery funding which is a UK concern.
Mo Farrah trains with a private coach. Not with the US National team coach. alberto salazar i believe.

overseas athletes dont get to train and use the UK Sport setup. they can maybe train individually with specific athletes, but overseas athletes wont get access to the coaching, nutritionists, physios, sports science analytics, etc, etc.

look at what Brailsford did with GB cycling. Its all about massive attention to details and incredible analytics, discipline and hard work with a big team of experts supporting the athletes. No overseas players got any of that action as it was funded by UK Sport.

I believe Scotland have a centre of excellence already (Aberdeen?). So now they need to find the funding to keep the existing coaches and nutritionists there.

As far as I know, Lotteries are licenced to companies to organise them (i.e., Camelot in the UK). What is to stop iScotland licensing Camelot to run the Euro & National lottery in Scotland?

Ger Hartman (based in the University of Limerick) treats loads of British athletes like Paula Radcliffe. They just fly in and out for treatment. He has been the Physical Therapist to the British Olympic team up to last Olympics when he became the Irish one. So, not all your specialists are based in England. They just fly in and out to Ger in Limerick (he also has a clinic I think in Kenya).

CJ Stander's Mrs is a SA swimmer who trains with the Ireland Coach & squad in Limerick.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:50 am

lostinwales wrote:
Last thought, when do the SNP rename themselves SUKIP?

They never will. The next Government party of the UK have copyrighted the term Southern Unhinged Kaiseristic Independence Party in preparation for Leadership. I hear Farage did the paperwork to gain the copyright in secret, by making his velvet collared coat wear shades.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:53 am

Scrumpy wrote:

"At long last will have a chance of being an independent country one that won't have to fund the Bitter Jocks north of the border ( ) at the expense of the equally hard working people in the North, South, East and West of England. (Just need rid of the Welsh and NI)"

Having a schizophrenic morning, are we, Scrumpy?

by Scrumpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:55 am

No, just being balanced! thumbsup

by HammerofThunor Thu 18 Sep 2014, 11:56 am

Ah, the BBC's idea of balance. Two extremists, one from each side.

by Scrumpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:00 pm

That's about right!

Good old Auntie

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:09 pm

Extremist One: .....and that is why I think it's important for the Scottish people to....
Extremist Two: ..... don't shout at me! You're........ let me............... let me get a word in without shouting me down!!!!
Extremist One: ..... you've interupted me chain of thought. Wait your turn..........
Extremist Two: See this is what I mean...intimidatio..............
Extremist One: Ye want to impose your views on us and we're not havin............
Extremist Two: Don't shout at me!!! You're looking at me in a threatening way!!! This is what's wron............
Extremist One: Don't shout at me!!! You've an evil eye on me...in a threatening way!!!! This is typical of..........

BBC interviewer (having a smoke and a cup of tea) whispered:
Stop. Stop. Let both of you speak together please. Stop. Please. Let's be mannerly and talk through each other. Stop... now let both of you finish your points together.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:31 pm

"Us"?

Technically, you should have said something like:

"Would we really miss the rest of us?"

Wink

Just being mischevously PC correct here for discussion's sake, Scrumpy.

But then again, they never really..................

Well, - just let them vote. A few hours more will decide if they're Them or Us.

by Scrumpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:32 pm

Turncoats

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:34 pm

They're Them so.... no matter what the result.

by Scrumpy Thu 18 Sep 2014, 12:49 pm

I can't help but think the scares caused by this vote will be long lasting for many, which ever way it goes.

A Nation divided, well done the SNP.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 1:02 pm

Maybe.

But the concept of a nation united can often only be a politically expedient fantasy too.............. as England's relationship with the EU exposes.

That IN/OUT debate, if it happens, will divide the UK again and more especially England itself, and maybe more dramatically than this present one divided the Yes and No camps. And when that referendum comes, Scotland will hardly even get a mention during the debate, whether or not they are still in the Union.

So don't go gunning for the Scots. The polarising attitudes always exist.... in any grouping. Those that want to go that way, and those that would quite like to go this way.

by ME-109 Thu 18 Sep 2014, 1:20 pm

Yawn Fly....your EU stuff is always enlightening in its rhetoric and evil empire stuff (or is that an Anti German thing manifesting itself Whistle

).

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 1:42 pm

ME-109 wrote:Yawn Fly....your EU stuff is always enlightening in its rhetoric and evil empire stuff (or is that an Anti German thing manifesting itself ).

I know your love of the EU is true, ME. It's been duly noted more than once. Thus the proof that the This Way/That Way crowd exist in every Nation.

Anti-Germanism? As Titular Head of a United States on un-voted for Union...yep.
Call me up on it any time. 'Anti' is a useful word when you want to be against something in principle.

I'll wait for you to come arrest me for sedition against the Cause when we're given that Union as a Present (not voted for) sometime in the next 20 years.

by LordDowlais Thu 18 Sep 2014, 2:11 pm

SecretFly wrote:Maybe.

But the concept of a nation united can often only be a politically expedient fantasy too.............. as England's relationship with the EU exposes.

That IN/OUT debate, if it happens, will divide the UK again and more especially England itself, and maybe more dramatically than this present one divided the Yes and No camps. And when that referendum comes, Scotland will hardly even get a mention during the debate, whether or not they are still in the Union.

So don't go gunning for the Scots. The polarising attitudes always exist.... in any grouping. Those that want to go that way, and those that would quite like to go this way.

SF, why do you keep referring to the UK as ENGLAND ? Is this your agenda behind your views ? You are starting to come across with a subtle dislike towards England, perhaps because your from Ireland you do not get what being in the UK means to most of the people who are in the UK, Ireland are with the EU that's theirs and your business, perhaps us people within the UK have different views on the matter.

by **Notch** Thu 18 Sep 2014, 2:18 pm

Not all of them Lord. Lord knows, not all of them.

by SecretFly Thu 18 Sep 2014, 2:23 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
SF, why do you keep referring to the UK as ENGLAND ? Is this your agenda behind your views ? You are starting to come across with a subtle dislike towards England, perhaps because your from Ireland you do not get what being in the UK means to most of the people who are in the UK, Ireland are with the EU that's theirs and your business, perhaps us people within the UK have different views on the matter.

Because I tend to forget Wales? Is that the answer you're looking for? A mention of Wales?

But back to the truth - I highlight England when the 'England' part of the UK is my subject matter.

I suppose I might say: "Wait your turn. When I want to discuss the Welsh bit, or the Northern Irish bit, I'll do so 9and many times have done so - but not until I want to.

Now - Scrumpy? What is he? British? Maybe he is. His Britishness wasn't the subject matter of my comments though. But his Englishness is and was.

Why?

Scrumpy: "At long last will have a chance of being an independent country one that won't have to fund the Bitter Jocks north of the border ( ) at the expense of the equally hard working people in the North, South, East and West of England. (Just need rid of the Welsh and NI)"

Why do you always need the logic of discussion pointed out for you so precisely. It's bloody tiring keeping you going, Lord. I can't be doing your reasoning for you and this will have to stop.

by LordDowlais Thu 18 Sep 2014, 2:23 pm

Notch wrote:Not all of them Lord. Lord knows, not all of them.

I know, that is why half of Scotland want to vote YES. Doh

by LordDowlais Thu 18 Sep 2014, 2:26 pm

SecretFly wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
SF, why do you keep referring to the UK as ENGLAND ? Is this your agenda behind your views ? You are starting to come across with a subtle dislike towards England, perhaps because your from Ireland you do not get what being in the UK means to most of the people who are in the UK, Ireland are with the EU that's theirs and your business, perhaps us people within the UK have different views on the matter.

Because I tend to forget Wales? Is that the answer you're looking for? A mention of Wales?But back to the truth - I highlight England when the 'England' part of the UK is my subject matter.

I suppose I might say: "Wait your turn. When I want to discuss the Welsh bit, or the Northern Irish bit, I'll do so 9and many times have done so - but not until I want to.

Now - Scrumpy? What is he? British? Maybe he is. His Britishness wasn't the subject matter of my comments though. But his Englishness is and was.

Why?

Scrumpy: "At long last will have a chance of being an independent country one that won't have to fund the Bitter Jocks north of the border ( ) at the expense of the equally hard working people in the North, South, East and West of England. (Just need rid of the Welsh and NI)"

Why do you always need the logic of discussion pointed out for you so precisely. It's bloody tiring keeping you going, Lord. I can't be doing your reasoning for you and this will have to stop.

No, I want you to use the term UK, when you keep implying everything to England, it sounds as if you have some obsession with that particular country, it's sound like you are basing your whole argument against THEM, when it should be against England, Wales and N Ireland as well, if you used the term UK it would not look like you have a subtle dislike towards England.

by Sponsored content