The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

If you don't agree with Neil you must be stupid/not interested/

[eFestivals]

If you don't agree with Neil you must be stupid/not interested/

Oh dear.

The people NOT being sovereign is there in the DIC in black and white. What you choose to do with that info is your choice and your consequences. That's one thing.

Still pretending that you are sovereign is something else.

[LJS]

Oh dear.

The people NOT being sovereign is there in the DIC in black and white. What you choose to do with that info is your choice and your consequences. That's one thing.

Still pretending that you are sovereign is something else.

I have explained clearly why I do not share your concerns. You didagree. That is fine. But it does not mean I have not read the DIC nor does it mean I have given no thought to my decision.

I have no more to add on the subject. I am content with my position.

Incidentally, the constitution was discussed at length last night & Danny Alexander appears to be amongst those who have failed to spot the problems only Neil can see. I'm sure he would have mentioned it if he had spotted it. After all he did imply that all our friends & relations south of the border will suddenly become somehow foreign.

Actually, I think you should maybe get in touch with the no thanx campaign as their campaign is missing lots of the hard hitting points you keep making.

Ride to the union's defence, Neil. Your country needs you.

[eFestivals]

I have explained clearly why I do not share your concerns. You didagree. That is fine. But it does not mean I have not read the DIC nor does it mean I have given no thought to my decision.

I have no more to add on the subject. I am content with my position.

But it's quite laughable. You're condemning Westminster as a broken system, when what you're championing is mostly the same, and sometimes worse.

1. in both, a minority vote gets full power.

2. in both, the politicans hold all power and 'the people' have no power. Everything is subject *only* to the wants of politicans, and they can and will push thru laws against the wishes of the people (exactly as will be the case with the DIC).

And then it gets laughable because you won't actually tell Alex that he's ignoring the wishes of the people.

3. and now onto where Holyrood is worse, because it has no checks or balances on the exectutive powers of those politicians. The HoL is very far from perfect, but it's better than nothing at all.

(and unlike the nats like to suggest with their online postings, the unelected HoL makes no laws and stops no laws, it merely acts as a check on what the elected politicans are doing. Just in case you were believing the idiot-Nat line).

Incidentally, the constitution was discussed at length last night & Danny Alexander appears to be amongst those who have failed to spot the problems only Neil can see.

If I'm wrong, show me in the DIC where it says 'the people' hold sovereignty over politicans INCLUDING the methods via which they exercise that control.

If you've read and understood the DIC, that'll be an easy task.

And yet again, what follows will only be silence.

But I'm wrong, yeah?

I'm sure he would have mentioned it if he had spotted it. After all he did imply that all our friends & relations south of the border will suddenly become somehow foreign.

He's 100% right, literally.

Do you really think he's wrong?

Actually, I think you should maybe get in touch with the no thanx campaign as their campaign is missing lots of the hard hitting points you keep making.

And the point would be what, in speaking to deaf ears like yours?

Don't go pretending you're open to persuation or the facts. Anything which is too inconvenient for you you refuse to address (see just above!).

Ride to the union's defence, Neil. Your country needs you.

Not as much as yours is going to need you ... and your ability to pay higher taxes for fewer services. Edited August 2, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

He's 100% right, literally.

Do you really think he's wrong?

Yes he is 100% wrong - my brother who has lived in England for over 40 years will still be my brother. Just as my cousins in Canada have always been as much my cousins as my cousins in Scotland. Their nationality & where they live is completely irrelevant.

As for friends - I don not currently select my friends on the basis of their nationality nor does it hold any relevance at all for me. I even have some English friends Why would independence make make any difference to that?

But the no campaign keeps blabbering on about people "becoming" foreigners & families being "divided"

load of pish!!!

Edited August 2, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

Don't go pretending you're open to persuation or the facts. Anything which is too inconvenient for you you refuse to address (see just above!).

I have addressed in full on numerous occasions but not to your satisfaction.

terribly sorry about that.

[eFestivals]

Yes he is 100% wrong - my brother who has lived in England for over 40 years will still be my brother. Just as my cousins in Canada have always been as much my cousins as my cousins in Scotland. Their nationality & where they live is completely irrelevant.

As for friends - I don not currently select my friends on the basis of their nationality nor does it hold any relevance at all for me. I even have some English friends Why would independence make make any difference to that?

But the no campaign keeps blabbering on about people "becoming" foreigners & families being "divided"

load of pish!!!

Do you think of people in (say) America as foriegn? And might that be because they live in a foriegn country?

If Scotland votes yes, that makes rUK a foriegn country to Scotland, and Scotland a foriegn country to the UK.

How you might choose to regard friends and family in that foriegn country is purely up to you, but the simple literal fact is that* they become foriegners.

(* on the basis of those in each country taking only the nationality of their country of residence, hardly a wacky idea).

Do you regard people in Ireland as being British? I certainly don't, and I suspect they might take offence if I did. They wish their separateness from the UK to mean something real - that they are a foriegn country, and via that they are foriegners.

That doesn't mean hate, or dislike, or anything nasty. But it does mean a separateness, by the fact of the British and Irish being separate in how we govern our lives.

By itself that 'foriegn' means very little, and so in theory it might be ignoired as you're choosing to do. But then, if you look at the real world, you get to see that it has very real effects - the important part for it's impact onto Scotland.

Currently, 70% of Scottish exports are exported to the UK (and just 12% to other EU countries). There's no other EU member who is so dependent on one country for their economic future.

(the next nearest within the EU is less than half as dependent).

And post indy, what happens? People in the UK will firstly try to source their commercial needs from within the home country (just as Scots will attempt to first source within Scotland) - because we know and understand all of the legal positions, there's no faffing around with currency changes, a different set of regs we might have to meet, etc, etc, etc. It just feels safer.

Over time - and with some things, almost instantly - the demand for Scottish goods and services from rUK will fall away. Costing real people in Scotland their real jobs, and undermining iScotland's fiscal position.

(Yes, the same things will happen the other way too, but the impact will be far far lower onto rUK)

I won't make any attemnpt at trying to quantify how damaging this might be to real people iScotland - it could be very small, it might be thumpingly huge - but there will be a measurable impact from this scenario, including onto the ability of the SG to provide public services (and so causing cits, or higher taxes).

The point is that Scotland making itself foriegn to rUK will cause such things to happen. A 15 minute glance of export comparisons for other countries, plus the histories of other new states, shows that separation politically leads to a greater economic separation too.

Perhaps you personally might manage to avoid making any separation in your head, but people with such thinking will be a small minority. Being foreign causes others to treat as a foriegn.

Edited August 3, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I have addressed in full on numerous occasions but not to your satisfaction.

terribly sorry about that.

What you've given is an empty assertion.

If you're right, you can point me at the fact.

There's a reason why you don't, and it's because you're not even addressing it to your own satisfaction.

[LJS]

I agree with Neil...

"By itself that 'foriegn' means very little"

[eFestivals]

I agree with Neil...

"By itself that 'foriegn' means very little"

I see you've gone for just half the idea yet again, pretending that there's nothing of the negative-for-Scotland part of it.

Perhaps you could vote for half-independence to go along with it?

Oh, that's all that's on offer anyway.

As pointed out by an SNP member of 50+ years an and ex Lord Provost. Who also said that Alex & co are waaaay out of their depth and they know it*.

(* no shit Sherlock ).

Meanwhile, back in Scotland, a big chunk of Scotlanders have been working that "foriegn" idea for their little-Scotlander minds for a long time already to the benefit of the Scottish economy, so there's not even much of a home-market-bonus to be got for iScotland.

[eFestivals]

Soooo.... in this campaign, at least online, we've had....

"saying anything negative makes us dislike you".....

thru to Project McFear of "the privatisation of NHS England will destroy NHS Scotland" and "if you vote no Westminster will punish us"....

thru to Project McScottish where no voters are being labelled 'traitors' and 'quislings' (sounds positive if it's a no vote :blink)

And now it looks like we have Project Anti-McCrone ( ), with claims of a massive new oil find that's being hidden from Scotland by Westminster.

Are the Nats desperate, much?

[eFestivals]

The chance of the much needed game-changer tomorrow, perhaps, when Salmond and Darling have their first live TV debate.

I'd quite like to watch that, s0o I'll have to try and find it online.

[russycarps]

The chance of the much needed game-changer tomorrow, perhaps, when Salmond and Darling have their first live TV debate.

I'd quite like to watch that, s0o I'll have to try and find it online.

is darling is a good public speaker? I would like to see salmond and galloway debate this. Though I've seen galloway let himself down a fair few times on question time.

[eFestivals]

is darling is a good public speaker? I would like to see salmond and galloway debate this. Though I've seen galloway let himself down a fair few times on question time.

I don't think Darling will be brilliant, but I don't think he'll need to be. I suspect that anyone who might be swayed by presentation skills has already been swayed, and so it'll be words that count.

And while Salmond can talk up the dream, I suspect it's substance that people will want. And on the one matter of most importance (for those who still might be swayed) - currency - Salmond has no answer at all.

And luckily for Darling, the thing he's most vulnerable for from his political past - the banks & bankers - is an area where Salmond won't be keen to go, because Salmond's record via his call for weaker regulation of the banks, and his infamous "for Scotland" letter to Fred the Shred, is worse than anything Darling might be accused of.

However it goes, I have no doubt that the raving Nats will proclaim a victory by God Alex, but that's not necessarily how it will work for the rest. Those whose votes might change will be looking for more than political points scoring.

[LJS]

Soooo.... in this campaign, at least online, we've had....

"saying anything negative makes us dislike you".....

thru to Project McFear of "the privatisation of NHS England will destroy NHS Scotland" and "if you vote no Westminster will punish us"....

thru to Project McScottish where no voters are being labelled 'traitors' and 'quislings' (sounds positive if it's a no vote :blink)

And now it looks like we have Project Anti-McCrone ( ), with claims of a massive new oil find that's being hidden from Scotland by Westminster.

Are the Nats desperate, much?

Project McScottish? Really? A few nutters on social media are now the Yes campaign. I thought better of you, Neil, than to fall for that one.

& of course we know that Westminster would never try & cover up good news about north sea oil reserves....don't we?

Edited August 4, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

I believe the debate will be available on line. Try stv website?

John curtice says darling's best tactic is to be as boring as possible.

That should be easy enough!

Edited August 4, 2014 by LJS

[eFestivals]

Project McScottish? Really? A few nutters on social media are now the Yes campaign. I thought better of you, Neil, than to fall for that one.

It might be coming from a smallish number of people (I tend to read the comments and not notice who the person is), but the number of tho9se sorts of statements has grown a lot in the last couple of weeks in the places i'm reading.

& of course we know that Westminster would never try & cover up good news about north sea oil reserves....don't we?

And now we also know that there's nothing that yes supporters won't make up or believe on the basis of nothing.

As I keep pointing out: the rationale used to keep the 70's McCrone report private (and there's no law that says reports like that have to be published, not even in glorious post-18th iScotland) turned out to be 100% spot on, as the fact of the indyref now gets to show.

Or is Scottish 'me me me and only me' greed the new socialism?

[eFestivals]

I believe the debate will be available on line. Try stv website?

John curtice says darling's best tactic is to be as boring as possible.

That should be easy enough!

And from the other side, Salmond's best tactic is to be as convincing as possible with facts of real substance.

So that's Alex in shit-creek.

[eFestivals]

I believe the debate will be available on line. Try stv website?

John curtice says darling's best tactic is to be as boring as possible.

That should be easy enough!

And more seriously ....

Yesterday the Guardian published an article with advice for Alex to not come across as smary-smartarse (which we all know will be difficult for him), and in the sub-headline they'd said something about him remaining "sober".

I've just seen that they've amended the headline, after loads of complaints that The Guardian were trying to label him a pisshead.

Perhaps the much-claimed better Scottish education isn't so great after all? Or is it that national paranoia can easily trump it?

Edited August 4, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

It might be coming from a smallish number of people (I tend to read the comments and not notice who the person is), but the number of tho9se sorts of statements has grown a lot in the last couple of weeks in the places i'm reading.

& of course, you won't have seen any abuse from "no" supporters?

The fact is you can find this sort of stuff from both sides and from what I have seen neither side has a convincing lead in terms of quantity.

Of course the internet is full of such nonsense and it is not limited by any means to the indy debate, but of course that section of the electorate who don't fritter their lives away on line don't know that - hence the No campaigns obsession with so called "cybernats" who are presented as somehow representative of the Yes campaign.

Like I said - I thought you would know better!!!

[LJS]

And now we also know that there's nothing that yes supporters won't make up or believe on the basis of nothing.

As I keep pointing out: the rationale used to keep the 70's McCrone report private (and there's no law that says reports like that have to be published, not even in glorious post-18th iScotland) turned out to be 100% spot on, as the fact of the indyref now gets to show.

Or is Scottish 'me me me and only me' greed the new socialism?

& if the rumours of a Clare field bonanza are correct, Westminster, by your logic, would be entirely justified in keeping this information out of the public domain.

The problem with withholding information ( as they did with McCrone) is that when rumours like this start(even if they are baseless), any denials lack credibility.

Its a kind of inverse boy who cried wolf thing - maybe ... sort of

[eFestivals]

& of course, you won't have seen any abuse from "no" supporters?

Well of course I have - tho rather amusingly, the "abuse" is mostly people encouraging people like you to vote yes. So it is really abuse?

The fact is you can find this sort of stuff from both sides and from what I have seen neither side has a convincing lead in terms of quantity.

Of course the internet is full of such nonsense and it is not limited by any means to the indy debate, but of course that section of the electorate who don't fritter their lives away on line don't know that - hence the No campaigns obsession with so called "cybernats" who are presented as somehow representative of the Yes campaign.

Like I said - I thought you would know better!!!

I've merely commented on what i've seen - a growing desperation, that's coming out in a number of different ways.

I notice you didn't pull me up on the "huge oil find" thing, which is no less ridiculous a thing for people to be doing, and you've obviously seen. Who do they think they're going to fool?

It's like putting up a big sign saying "if you're really really stupid believe what i say".

If you care to remember, it was people in Scotland saying how much they didn't like that sort of thing, just a few months ago. Is it OK to do now, then?

[eFestivals]

& if the rumours of a Clare field bonanza are correct, Westminster, by your logic, would be entirely justified in keeping this information out of the public domain.

In light of what some in Scotland would like to do, why wouldn't it be reasonable of them?

For all of the while that the UK is the UK, any oil belongs to the UK and not to Scotland. And for all of the while that the UK is the UK, the govt of the UK has a responsibility to all of the UK and not just to Scotland.

As Scotland might use knowledge of the oil as a reason to 'steal' the oil, why should Westminster facilitate a 'crime' onto itself?

But anyway, this is all hypothetical, and in no way applicable to today's world where it just wouldn't be possible to hush this stuff up now.

The problem with withholding information ( as they did with McCrone) is that when rumours like this start(even if they are baseless), any denials lack credibility.

Its a kind of inverse boy who cried wolf thing - maybe ... sort of

yup, you're certainly correct about that - and yet strangely, none of the SNP's past 'crimes' count as black marks against the SNP. It might even be said that there's some hugely biased cp0onsiderations going on.

[LJS]

Lovin' your logic Neil.

You constantly criticise the "lies" of the snp but if the Westminster government lies that is justified.

Is that what they mean by "Best of both worlds?"

[eFestivals]

Lovin' your logic Neil.

You constantly criticise the "lies" of the snp but if the Westminster government lies that is justified.

Is that what they mean by "Best of both worlds?"

There's lies to benefit the population under that govt, and then there's lies to benefit just the politicians.

When Alex tells you that voting yes will make you richer, who is that lie designed to benefit? You, or Alex?

When Alex tells you that instant EU entry is guaranteed, who is that lie designed to benefit? You, or Alex?

When Alex tells you that a CU with rUK is assured, who is that lie designed to benefit? You, or Alex?

When Alex tells you that more and more oil is going to flow from a shrinking resource, who is that lie designed to benefit? You, or Alex?

Meanwhile, when the UK govt hides from the UK population (including the population Scotland), who is that lie designed to benefit? The people of the UK, or just the politicians?

And so, you see, on when compared on an equal basis and not a biased self-serving basis, all lies do not serve the same purpose. The only ones trying to get the "best of both worlds" are those who use a biased basis to reach a warped conclusion to try and con suckers like you into giving them support on a false basis.

But you'll pretend otherwise, because you won't face up to the facts. To both you and Alex, Alex's lies are worth it for the result they might deliver, and who cares about the real impact onto real people lives if you've got your ideological but financially fucked-up dream? The result is everything and fuck the people of Scotland. They need to be lied to by Alex for their own good, eh?