The Dirty Independence Question

[Buff124]

Nope, it appears that you misunderstand sovereignty as applied by Liz.

Liz owns every bit of dirt of the UK, Canada, Oz, and other places too.

Canada ????

Somebody better tell the Mohawk that they don't own their own territory. Probable safer not to tell them face to face.

[eFestivals]

2 incorrect statements in one sentence

1: "you've constantly been saying that indy will improve things" -

I don't do certainty - I leave that to fools. I believe the best HOPE for a better future lies with independence. I am not certain of anything

2: " yet you're now admitting that you know it won't" : now I could see how you made the first mistake but I have certainly never "admitted" any such thing.

Now who comes along when you accuse me of saying things i haven't said...

you've missed him haven't you?

admit it!

A hope based in nothing then, which is even worse that i suggested for you.

People have a choice in the current UK set-up. The problem is the choices they make, and the choices in Scotland are exactly the same as elsewhere even if some have better propaganda than others.

Edited May 21, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Canada ????

Somebody better tell the Mohawk that they don't own their own territory. Probable safer not to tell them face to face.

It's hardly a secret.

http://www.businessinsider.com/worlds-biggest-landowners-2011-3?op=1

[LJS]

Nope, it appears that you misunderstand sovereignty as applied by Liz.

Liz owns every bit of dirt of the UK, Canada, Oz, and other places too.

When someone "buys" some land as freehold, they don't own it - Liz does. She merely allows the freeholder to hold that land for free.

Unless she wants it back.

That's what you're getting with indy too. Nothing of that changes.

OK

the "fact" that the queen owns all these places makes exactly what difference to anything in the real world?

[LJS]

I do not believe any party left of (current) Labour will win a UK election in the next 20 years.

I also do not believe that any party left of Labour will win in an independent Scotland.

I also believe that the UKIP "phenomenon" remains utterly irrelevant, and at best they will start to rival the Greens in size. I don't think they have any chance of having any impact in Westminster.

And, if my last point is wrong, I believe the balance to UKIP's success will involve a number of left-leaning voters to be more prepared to vote Green over Labour/Libs as a product of the right vote being more split.

A view you are entirely entitled to

thanks for answering my question.

[eFestivals]

I also believe that the UKIP "phenomenon" remains utterly irrelevant,

currently it is, but there's a lot of mileage to be got from blaming all of a country's problems on outside forces. Just look north.

It's taken 40+ years for the SNP to build themselves up, with pretty steady progress all the way, and nothing to hold them to account for (not even in the SG, where nothing is the SNP's fault, it's all the fault of Westminster).

It's taken 30 years for the LibDems to build themselves up, with pretty steady progress all the way, and nothing to hold them to account for ... until they had a hold of real power, and blew it.

UKIP are over 20 years old, but they've got nowhere in that time. Tomorrow they'll blow the house down, but it's an election few people think matters, and they'll still do completely shite next May.

Where things go from next May tho will depend on what happens as a result of tomorrow. They could be left with just the racists and xenophobes for support, or stupid might get more stupid.

[Buff124]

What seems to have passed many people on Scotland by is that they've been voting just as much for the right as the rest of the UK.

No, I think we noticed that a few years back.

[eFestivals]

OK

the "fact" that the queen owns all these places makes exactly what difference to anything in the real world?

No law can be passed without her say so (and she says so, but we're not allowed to know) and she has henchmen in Parliaments to stop any process instantly if necessary (and it happens, even in Westminster), and she'll veto laws and cause constitutional coups if it's threatened.

Go read up about Gough Wittlam for an easy introduction.

[eFestivals]

No, I think we noticed that a few years back.

so what benefit does indy bring?

[LJS]

A hope based in nothing then, which is even worse that i suggested for you.

People have a choice in the current UK set-up. The problem is the choices they make, and the choices in Scotland are exactly the same as elsewhere even if some have better propaganda than others.

because you disagree with the basis of my argument does not mean it is based on nothing.

politics of the fucking playground!!!

[Buff124]

It's hardly a secret.

http://www.businessinsider.com/worlds-biggest-landowners-2011-3?op=1

She isn't Queen Elizabeth II here.

She is Elizabeth I, Queen of Scots (not Scotland)

[kaosmark2]

A view you are entirely entitled to

thanks for answering my question.

I don't begrudge the Scottish the right or the decision to vote independence. I don't think it'll make anything better, and most likely will make things worse, but noone can know for sure unless there's a yes result and we see.

I do however, object to the idea that the SNP could be the saviours of Scotland from the evils inflicted upon the Scottish by Westminster. Lots of people South of the border have just as much resentment towards successive right/centre-right/centre-right-masquerading-as-centre-left governments. I don't think you can escape from the idiotic voters we live near any more than we can.

[eFestivals]

She isn't Queen Elizabeth II here.

She is Elizabeth I, Queen of Scots (not Scotland)

and a number and label makes all the difference to the power she wields.

[Buff124]

so what benefit does indy bring?

[eFestivals]

because you disagree with the basis of my argument does not mean it is based on nothing.

politics of the fucking playground!!!

... so where does the hope come from?

What tangible thing is there which leads you to think that those hopes have a greater chance of fulfilment in iScotland than the UK?

Propaganda that says left while doing right is nothing to give hope. There's already nuLabour doing that.

[eFestivals]

So nothing at all for the people of Scotland, tho Rupert thinks it's a great idea for you to vote yes.

Edited May 21, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

No law can be passed without her say so (and she says so, but we're not allowed to know) and she has henchmen in Parliaments to stop any process instantly if necessary (and it happens, even in Westminster), and she'll veto laws and cause constitutional coups if it's threatened.

Go read up about Gough Wittlam for an easy introduction.

so, who will be the governor general of scotland?

Lord Darling? The Viscount of Kirkcaldy? Dame Susan Boyle?

you really really think they will try & appoint one?

You really think we would buy that?

Now, I've followed politics fairly closely most of my life, but this is news to me. Tell me a bit more about the Queen's henchmen & perchance an example where she or these Henchmen have actually altered anything.

[LJS]

I don't begrudge the Scottish the right or the decision to vote independence. I don't think it'll make anything better, and most likely will make things worse, but noone can know for sure unless there's a yes result and we see.

I do however, object to the idea that the SNP could be the saviours of Scotland from the evils inflicted upon the Scottish by Westminster. Lots of people South of the border have just as much resentment towards successive right/centre-right/centre-right-masquerading-as-centre-left governments. I don't think you can escape from the idiotic voters we live near any more than we can.

you may be right.

I may be wrong.

I opposed independence through all the years when it would unarguably have made Scotland rich for precisely the reasons you have given.

I just can't see a way forward that way.

I believe there is a good possibility (not a certainty) that things could be better in Scotland.

[LJS]

... so where does the hope come from?

What tangible thing is there which leads you to think that those hopes have a greater chance of fulfilment in iScotland than the UK?

Propaganda that says left while doing right is nothing to give hope. There's already nuLabour doing that.

I have answered this question on several occasions.

You are getting tiresome!

[eFestivals]

so, who will be the governor general of scotland?

you'll have to ask Liz.

you really really think they will try & appoint one?

You really think we would buy that?

It's not for sale, by your own choices. It's Liz you're voting for and Liz you'll get.

Now, I've followed politics fairly closely most of my life, but this is news to me. Tell me a bit more about the Queen's henchmen & perchance an example where she or these Henchmen have actually altered anything.

Stood next to the speaker at every Westminster session is Liz's Serjeant-at-Arms (or a deputy, etc), who has the authority to shut down any debate at any time - and it happens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serjeant-at-Arms

[eFestivals]

I have answered this question on several occasions.

You are getting tiresome!

There's nothing at all to indicate any different political outcomes, not a jot of anything.

Misplaced hope might as well be no hope.

[LJS]

you'll have to ask Liz.

It's not for sale, by your own choices. It's Liz you're voting for and Liz you'll get.

Stood next to the speaker at every Westminster session is Liz's Serjeant-at-Arms (or a deputy, etc), who has the authority to shut down any debate at any time - and it happens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serjeant-at-Arms

so your helpful link gave one example of when the Sergeant at arse actually did something & how it was immediately made clear it wouldn't happen again -like i said before these powers are "use 'em & lose 'em"

Thank you for demonstrating my point>

In November 2008, following the controversial arrest of Shadow Immigration Minister Damian Green, and subsequent search of his parliamentary office by the Metropolitan Police, who were given written consent to do so by the Serjeant-at-Arms without holding a search warrant, the Speaker of the House stated that the protocol would in future require a search warrant and his personal approval before such a search could happen. ^[7] The Speaker's assertion in this speech that the Police had failed in their obligation to inform the Serjeant-at-Arms of the fact that they required a warrant was denied by Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick.^[8]

from the BBC

7. David Colby asks: "The day after Scottish independence Alex Salmond would become one of the queen's prime ministers, 'just like Canada' we've been told. As such he would be required to 'advise' [instruct] her as to whom he would like Scotland's first Governor General to be. Who does he have in mind?"

The Scottish government says there would not be a Governor General of an independent Scotland, as Her Majesty the Queen would continue as head of state with exactly the same status in Scotland as she currently has.

Big Liz may have all these powers on paper but they are not worth a Snuff.

How exactly would she enforce them in iScotland?

Will the Household Cavalry attack Gretna?

[LJS]

There's nothing at all to indicate any different political outcomes, not a jot of anything.

Misplaced hope might as well be no hope.

that is your opinion which you are entitled to.

My opinion is that "There's nothing at all to indicate any different political outcomes, not a jot of anything" in the UK

So I have chosen to place my hope elsewhere.

Edited May 21, 2014 by LJS

[Buff124]

There's nothing at all to indicate any different political outcomes, not a jot of anything.

Misplaced hope might as well be no hope.

There is always hope.

Here's another wee under the radar thing, a report called Democracy Max: The Sovereignty of the People, produced by the Electoral Reform Society.

A deliberation by prominent national figures, none of whom are prominent within the political party that Neil seems to hate more than any other.

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/images/dynamicImages/erss_roundtable1_a5_web(1).pdf

[Buff124]

I tend to think that Scottish civic society has already discounted the idea that a Yes vote is a total rejection of all aspects of the Union as being an over simplification of the political reality following a hypothetical (caveats!) Yes vote. .

In much the same way, a No vote has been publicly discounted by the UK PM, Deputy PM, and other UK Govt Ministers as being a total acceptance of the status quo.

The polarised, excluded middle strategy will not last the course of the full 16 week Referendum campaign that officially begins on 29 May.

I will refrain from quoting PT Barnum.