|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 26, 2023 9:07:56 GMT
No wonder moray thinks you are a hun . You really do belong in the orange halls with the king billy brigade and their flat earth the world is only 6000 years old reality denying british nationalism.
I tried to join them because they seem to have such jolly Saturday nights in their cute little halls, but once they found out that I am a Republican and an Atheist, who believes that the UK should have ceased to exist a long time ago, then the shutters came down on me. Go figure! And I so wanted to dress up like a dick and take part in the occasional sad losers parade. Still, I guess that I could just join in with the “All Under One Banner” marches if I want to do that. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 26, 2023 10:15:01 GMT
everything you better together types told us would happen if we voted for scottish independence has happend because scotland voted no.
Few examples is food price. We were told food prices would be through the roof in 2014 if we voted for indy. Basic food staple in the uk went up 80 % in the last year.
Energy prices through the roof. We were told that if we voted indy energy would go up.
We even had that tit alisatair darling on telling us five days ago that the uk government wil not be able to meet pension liabilities in the future. Remember better togethers pensions doom and gloom part of project fear?
The idea you unionists are being taken seriously when you tell us no matter what the british do that is bad ( wether its brexit or whatever) independence is worse is laughable.
Which country has independence from london been that bad in any part of the world they have asked to come back happy?
I would rather be a master of my own destiny than a servant at another mans table , unlike you.
So, once again, you fail to even try to answer the question of how an Indy Scotland would deal with the massive economic and financial consequences of going it alone. Have you got an answer or don’t you care about how much harm and distress independence would bring to bear upon the Scottish people? Anyway, putting that crucial issue to one side for a moment, let’s deal with the non-answer that you managed to scrape together to try to make it look like you had a serious response to my post above ie. These things that you mention above, which have only happened in the last year or so, haven’t happened “because scotland (sic) voted no” as you claim above but would have happened irrespective of how we voted in the Indyref. However, if we had voted Yes in 2014 and become independent then an earlier version of these damaging things (and many more besides) would also have happened back then - and they would have been just a small part of the serious economic nosedive that we would had triggered, the debilitating consequences of which we would still now only be in the early stages of dealing with. So, if the events of the last year had come along (as they definitely would have) to pile further damage on top of the massive self-inflicted harm of independence, an Indy Scotland would have been much less able to absorb their effects and the outcomes would therefore have been even more distressing to us than they proved to be because we chose to remain part of the UK. I understand that Anguilla requested and received a return to British authority in the early ‘70s and, of course, Rhodesia/Zimbabwe did so for a short period under the Lancaster House Agreement. However, why does it matter what any other territory decided to do? Surely what matters here is what Scotland wants and what is best for Scotland ... and Scotland does not want independence because Scotland realises that independence is not the best option for Scotland. As for being “master of your own destiny” are you really reducing your argument to such vacuous emotive nonsense? You would be no more the master of your own destiny in a country of 5.4 million than you are in a country of 70 million. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 26, 2023 10:56:23 GMT
Whats your point om ? That free and independent nations can make the choice to join , or leave supra national organisations like NATO or the EU , unlike scotland? Free and independent countries can do that, not nations. While there is unquestionably a Scottish nation, Scotland is no longer a country but a territory within a country ie. the UK. So your country (the UK, obviously) can make these choices but the territory of Scotland, logically and rightly, no longer can. If you could just get your head around what our forefathers actually signed us up to when they implemented the Act of Union, rather than insisting that Scotland has a status, rights and entitlements that it does not have, then I am sure that you would realise that many of the slights that you feel we suffer are no such thing. Wouldn’t it be nice to free yourself up from all the unjustified resentment and bitterness that you carry around just because you don’t understand the 1707 deal? |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 26, 2023 10:56:25 GMT
It's all about hatred of the English with the SNAT cult.
No reasoning will ever get past the ingrained xenophobia.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Apr 28, 2023 7:37:49 GMT
everything you better together types told us would happen if we voted for scottish independence has happend because scotland voted no.
Few examples is food price. We were told food prices would be through the roof in 2014 if we voted for indy. Basic food staple in the uk went up 80 % in the last year.
Energy prices through the roof. We were told that if we voted indy energy would go up.
We even had that tit alisatair darling on telling us five days ago that the uk government wil not be able to meet pension liabilities in the future. Remember better togethers pensions doom and gloom part of project fear?
The idea you unionists are being taken seriously when you tell us no matter what the british do that is bad ( wether its brexit or whatever) independence is worse is laughable.
Which country has independence from london been that bad in any part of the world they have asked to come back happy?
I would rather be a master of my own destiny than a servant at another mans table , unlike you.
So, once again, you fail to even try to answer the question of how an Indy Scotland would deal with the massive economic and financial consequences of going it alone. Have you got an answer or don’t you care about how much harm and distress independence would bring to bear upon the Scottish people? . you repeatedly bleat about "facts". Yet in most of your posts , as above there are no "facts" just project fear fire flood and armageddon predictions for those who you politicaly disagree with regarding indy.
Here is a concrete fact for you.
65 nations have left london rule over the last few centuries , and not one of those nations has had economic and financial consequences that bad , any of them have asked to come back under london rule. Many of them are poorer by far than scotland .
Scotland would be no different. Your complete hyperbole and british nationalist hysteria wont change that "fact".
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Apr 28, 2023 7:43:12 GMT
everything you better together types told us would happen if we voted for scottish independence has happend because scotland voted no.
Few examples is food price. We were told food prices would be through the roof in 2014 if we voted for indy. Basic food staple in the uk went up 80 % in the last year.
Energy prices through the roof. We were told that if we voted indy energy would go up.
We even had that tit alisatair darling on telling us five days ago that the uk government wil not be able to meet pension liabilities in the future. Remember better togethers pensions doom and gloom part of project fear?
The idea you unionists are being taken seriously when you tell us no matter what the british do that is bad ( wether its brexit or whatever) independence is worse is laughable.
Which country has independence from london been that bad in any part of the world they have asked to come back happy?
I would rather be a master of my own destiny than a servant at another mans table , unlike you.
I understand that Anguilla requested and received a return to British authority in the early ‘70s yet another one of your fanciful dishonest descriptions. The above is in no way comparable to demanding independence from london rule and then asking to return to it.
During the early colonial period, Anguilla was administered by the British through Antigua; in 1825, it was placed under the administrative control of nearby Saint Kitts.[14] Anguilla was federated with St Kitts and Nevis in 1882, against the wishes of many Anguillans.[7] Economic stagnation, and the severe effects of several droughts in the 1890s and later the Great Depression of the 1930s led many Anguillans to emigrate for better prospects elsewhere
Full adult suffrage was introduced to Anguilla in 1952.[7] After a brief period as part of the West Indies Federation (1958–62), the island of Anguilla became part of the associated state of Saint Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla with full internal autonomy in 1967.[22] However many Anguillans had no wish to be a part of this union, and resented the dominance of St Kitts within it. On 30 May 1967 Anguillans forcibly ejected the St Kitts police force from the island and declared their separation from St Kitts following a referendum.[23][7][24] The events, led by Atlin Harrigan[25] and Ronald Webster among others, became known as the Anguillan Revolution; its goal was not independence per se, but rather independence from Saint Kitts and Nevis and a return to being a British colony.
With negotiations failing to break the deadlock, a second referendum confirming Anguillans' desire for separation from St Kitts was held and the Republic of Anguilla was declared unilaterally, with Ronald Webster as president. Efforts by British envoy William Whitlock failed to break the impasse and 300 British troops were subsequently sent in March 1969.[7] British authority was restored, and confirmed by the Anguilla Act of July 1971.[7] In 1980, Anguilla was finally allowed to formally secede from Saint Kitts and Nevis and become a separate British Crown colony (now a British overseas territory).[26][27][22][6][7] Since then, Anguilla has been politically stable, and has seen a large growth in its tourism and offshore financing sector
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Apr 28, 2023 7:46:37 GMT
everything you better together types told us would happen if we voted for scottish independence has happend because scotland voted no.
Few examples is food price. We were told food prices would be through the roof in 2014 if we voted for indy. Basic food staple in the uk went up 80 % in the last year.
Energy prices through the roof. We were told that if we voted indy energy would go up.
We even had that tit alisatair darling on telling us five days ago that the uk government wil not be able to meet pension liabilities in the future. Remember better togethers pensions doom and gloom part of project fear?
The idea you unionists are being taken seriously when you tell us no matter what the british do that is bad ( wether its brexit or whatever) independence is worse is laughable.
Which country has independence from london been that bad in any part of the world they have asked to come back happy?
I would rather be a master of my own destiny than a servant at another mans table , unlike you.
You would be no more the master of your own destiny in a country of 5.4 million than you are in a country of 70 million. you talk of vacuous nonsesne then come out with this whopper.
In an independent scotland , the people of scotland would get the government they elect. In the disunited kingdom , we get the government england elects , along with these little nasty surprises like brexit , which 62 % of scots voted against.
If being independent and getting your own government you elect and staying in the eu the majority support instead of being taken out by another country isnt being master of our own destiny then i dont know what is.
|
|
|
|
Post by borchester on Apr 28, 2023 7:50:28 GMT
I would rather be a master of my own destiny than a servant at another mans table , unlike you.
So why touch your cap to Brussels and apply for readmission to the EU ? |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 28, 2023 7:52:36 GMT
Because it isn't about independence at all, it's about extreme institutional hatred of the English.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Apr 28, 2023 7:58:17 GMT
I would rather be a master of my own destiny than a servant at another mans table , unlike you.
So why touch your cap to Brussels and apply for readmission to the EU ? im a proud european borkie. The comparison between being in the british prison and the european union of european nations is like comparing chalk and cheese mate. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 28, 2023 10:57:57 GMT
So, once again, you fail to even try to answer the question of how an Indy Scotland would deal with the massive economic and financial consequences of going it alone. Have you got an answer or don’t you care about how much harm and distress independence would bring to bear upon the Scottish people? . you repeatedly bleat about "facts". Yet in most of your posts , as above there are no "facts" just project fear fire flood and armageddon predictions for those who you politicaly disagree with regarding indy.
Here is a concrete fact for you.
65 nations have left london rule over the last few centuries , and not one of those nations has had economic and financial consequences that bad , any of them have asked to come back under london rule. Many of them are poorer by far than scotland .
Scotland would be no different. Your complete hyperbole and british nationalist hysteria wont change that "fact".
if, when you say that "Many of them are poorer by far than scotland ... Scotland would be no different." you mean that an Indy Scotland would be poorer than Scotland currently is, then I agree. That "fact" is so self-evident that only an idiot and/or a brainwashed zealot would argue otherwise - unless you are privy to crucial game-changing information that none of the rest of us are aware of. I have asked you this many times now and you have failed to answer, so I am pretty sure that you can't, but I will give you one more opportunity to demonstrate that you are not an idiot and/or a brain-washed zealot and ask you once again, what is the plan, in an Indy Scotland, to avoid the deep and damaging economic and financial hardship that we would face dealing with the following ie. revenues that are 25% below the cost of providing us with our current standard of living; the costs of establishing ourselves as a separate country outside of the UK: our share of the massive UK debt that we would walk away with, including the cost of servicing and reducing that massive debt to an acceptable level, particularly given the crippling rate we would have to accept should someone be prepared to take a risk on a new country with the financial problems that we would bring to the table: the struggle we would have attracting and retaining overseas investment from companies who would no longer be able to look upon locating in Scotland as a way into the much larger and more important UK market; retaining our brightest and best to help drive the newly independent Scotland up and out of the economic and financial hole that it would be in; coping with a MegaBrexit scenario if we walked away from, and put up barriers to, the single UK market by opting for EU membership instead? |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 28, 2023 11:19:47 GMT
I understand that Anguilla requested and received a return to British authority in the early ‘70s yet another one of your fanciful dishonest descriptions. The above is in no way comparable to demanding independence from london rule and then asking to return to it.
During the early colonial period, Anguilla was administered by the British through Antigua; in 1825, it was placed under the administrative control of nearby Saint Kitts.[14] Anguilla was federated with St Kitts and Nevis in 1882, against the wishes of many Anguillans.[7] Economic stagnation, and the severe effects of several droughts in the 1890s and later the Great Depression of the 1930s led many Anguillans to emigrate for better prospects elsewhere
Full adult suffrage was introduced to Anguilla in 1952.[7] After a brief period as part of the West Indies Federation (1958–62), the island of Anguilla became part of the associated state of Saint Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla with full internal autonomy in 1967.[22] However many Anguillans had no wish to be a part of this union, and resented the dominance of St Kitts within it. On 30 May 1967 Anguillans forcibly ejected the St Kitts police force from the island and declared their separation from St Kitts following a referendum.[23][7][24] The events, led by Atlin Harrigan[25] and Ronald Webster among others, became known as the Anguillan Revolution; its goal was not independence per se, but rather independence from Saint Kitts and Nevis and a return to being a British colony.
With negotiations failing to break the deadlock, a second referendum confirming Anguillans' desire for separation from St Kitts was held and the Republic of Anguilla was declared unilaterally, with Ronald Webster as president. Efforts by British envoy William Whitlock failed to break the impasse and 300 British troops were subsequently sent in March 1969.[7] British authority was restored, and confirmed by the Anguilla Act of July 1971.[7] In 1980, Anguilla was finally allowed to formally secede from Saint Kitts and Nevis and become a separate British Crown colony (now a British overseas territory).[26][27][22][6][7] Since then, Anguilla has been politically stable, and has seen a large growth in its tourism and offshore financing sector Are you completely losing it, Thomas? I said, and you quoted what I said back to me in your post above, that "I understand that Anguilla requested and received a return to British authority in the early ‘70s". What is "fanciful dishonest" about that? Not only is it true but you recognise it to be true by posting that the goal of the Anguillan Revolution was to “return to being a British colony“ (which it did, in 1980), and that “British authority was restored” in advance of that (ie. in the early '70s). I also note that you recognise that Anguilla appears to have benefitted since then, with it seeing "a large growth in its tourism and offshore financing sector". However, while I am sure that we are both delighted to see Anguilla getting the political arrangement that it wants and thriving under that arrangement, neither that nor the choice of any other territory is relevant here. What matters is what is best for Scotland and what Scotland's people want. Scotland’s people realise that independence is not the best outcome for Scotland and therefore reject the independence option. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 28, 2023 11:20:30 GMT
Like I say, what it's really about is hatred of the English.
He's in a cult.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 28, 2023 11:50:53 GMT
You would be no more the master of your own destiny in a country of 5.4 million than you are in a country of 70 million. you talk of vacuous nonsesne then come out with this whopper.
In an independent scotland , the people of scotland would get the government they elect. In the disunited kingdom , we get the government england elects , along with these little nasty surprises like brexit , which 62 % of scots voted against.
If being independent and getting your own government you elect and staying in the eu the majority support instead of being taken out by another country isnt being master of our own destiny then i dont know what is.
What a surprise! You change your argument once again when the old line of attack doesn't work. You didn't talk about being master of our own destiny, Thomas, as well you know. Rather, you said that you would rather be a "master of my own destiny". I didn't talk of "vacuous nonsense" but of "vacuous emotive nonsense". I think that it is important not to drop that reference to emotions here, because emotion (plus all of the Indy factoids that get endlessly trotted out) is the basis of much of what your, and the Indy argument in general, is based upon - not logic or fact. Some of the people of Scotland get the government that they elect and some don't (the majority being in the latter category) both at Holyrood and at Westminster. The same applies to the people of England when it comes to electing a Westminster government, of course. There is a problem with both electoral systems and that needs to be addressed. However, independence would not remedy this problem for Scotland’s people; only a change to the respective electoral systems would do that - and, even if independence would sort this problem out (which it wouldn’t), the majority of Scotland's people reject independence, so that option is a non-starter. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Apr 29, 2023 10:28:16 GMT
yet another one of your fanciful dishonest descriptions. The above is in no way comparable to demanding independence from london rule and then asking to return to it.
During the early colonial period, Anguilla was administered by the British through Antigua; in 1825, it was placed under the administrative control of nearby Saint Kitts.[14] Anguilla was federated with St Kitts and Nevis in 1882, against the wishes of many Anguillans.[7] Economic stagnation, and the severe effects of several droughts in the 1890s and later the Great Depression of the 1930s led many Anguillans to emigrate for better prospects elsewhere
Full adult suffrage was introduced to Anguilla in 1952.[7] After a brief period as part of the West Indies Federation (1958–62), the island of Anguilla became part of the associated state of Saint Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla with full internal autonomy in 1967.[22] However many Anguillans had no wish to be a part of this union, and resented the dominance of St Kitts within it. On 30 May 1967 Anguillans forcibly ejected the St Kitts police force from the island and declared their separation from St Kitts following a referendum.[23][7][24] The events, led by Atlin Harrigan[25] and Ronald Webster among others, became known as the Anguillan Revolution; its goal was not independence per se, but rather independence from Saint Kitts and Nevis and a return to being a British colony.
With negotiations failing to break the deadlock, a second referendum confirming Anguillans' desire for separation from St Kitts was held and the Republic of Anguilla was declared unilaterally, with Ronald Webster as president. Efforts by British envoy William Whitlock failed to break the impasse and 300 British troops were subsequently sent in March 1969.[7] British authority was restored, and confirmed by the Anguilla Act of July 1971.[7] In 1980, Anguilla was finally allowed to formally secede from Saint Kitts and Nevis and become a separate British Crown colony (now a British overseas territory).[26][27][22][6][7] Since then, Anguilla has been politically stable, and has seen a large growth in its tourism and offshore financing sector Are you completely losing it, Thomas? I said, and you quoted what I said back to me in your post above, that "I understand that Anguilla requested and received a return to British authority in the early ‘70s". What is "fanciful dishonest" about that? Not only is it true but you recognise it to be true by posting that the goal of the Anguillan Revolution was to “return to being a British colony“ (which it did, in 1980), and that “British authority was restored” in advance of that (ie. in the early '70s). I also note that you recognise that Anguilla appears to have benefitted since then, with it seeing "a large growth in its tourism and offshore financing sector". However, while I am sure that we are both delighted to see Anguilla getting the political arrangement that it wants and thriving under that arrangement, neither that nor the choice of any other territory is relevant here. What matters is what is best for Scotland and what Scotland's people want. Scotland’s people realise that independence is not the best outcome for Scotland and therefore reject the independence option. Lets proceed with happy jacks saturday morning lesson of the day.
The question was which country (entity) demanded independence from london rule , got it , then promptly asked for a return (because independence was that shite / economically independence was such a disaster that they longed to come back to british rule)
Happy jacks answer? Anguilla . Rhodesia.
Wrong. Go to the back of the class happy , zero points for the two wrong answers and a minus two awarded for wasting class time.
Why are your answers wrong? One ( Anguilla) is a small caribbean island just over half the size of Aberdeen which was colonised by the british in the 17th century , which was later federated against the will of the anguillans into the leeward islands federation , then when that collapsed , the british attemtped a further federation against the anguillans wishes ,with st kitts and nevis , where the anguillans ejected the st kitts polis , set up an independent republic from st kitts , and later the british against went in to stop the conflict with st kitts and eventually Anguilla became a british overseas territory.
Two points here. The anguillans didnt want independence from britian. In fact , they even petitioned the british government in 1872 for direct british rule , as they were against the federation with the other islands.
second point. British overseas territories are self governing states , within the remnants of the old british empire. This was similar to the old home rule scotland wanted in the early twentieth century , which hardcore unionists like you were against.
ie , self governing territory within the old empire.
Wrong. Wrong and wrong happy.
Slapped wrist for wasting valuable time .
your second answer rhodesia , is fucking laughable. A former british colony , that then went onto become an unrecognised state because the white minority declared UDI not becuase they wanted indy from britain , but because they wanted to delay the inevitable return to black majority rule due to the rapid decolonisation of africa in the sixties , and then went on to become the black majority ruled modern independent nation zimbabwe.
Wrong again. Does it need pointing out zimbabwe isnt under london rule today? So quite obviously the black native majority hated london rule that much ( surprise surprise ) they maintain their independent status.
lesson over . Happy , 3000 lines after class.
Repeat after me , i must not bullshit in class and waste valuable time.
|
|
