The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

Being fair, neither have the no side.

true, but there's been plenty of stuff come along that yes-ers want to believe as being in support of no, on the basis that it disputes the claims of yes or says something inconvenient to yes.

This is what i'm getting at with what I mentioned in the last few days, about how something classes as being worthwhile news. It works badly for yes (rather than being deliberate bias), just by the nature of things.

[eFestivals]

Pretty reasonable programme from Robert peston last night I thought. I could take issue with some bits of course but overall pretty fair.

There were a few contributions from a chap from the IFS which as you would expect highlighted some of the potential negatives for iScotland. However, when asked at the end how he would vote if he had a vote, he said he wouldn't base his decision on financial considerations as Scotland would be unlikely to be significantly better or worse off.

I said something similar when I started posting again in this thread at the start of the year.

But: you must remember, what he said was relevant to him, a wealthy man. A wealthy man can afford to carry being slightly worse off, whilst many in Scotland cannot.

Meanwhile, I do hope you noted what was said that I've said here and you've rejected (despite Salmond have said much the same thing): that iScotland has 30 years to carve itself a new economy, else it's going to be a bit fucked.

It's quite possible that iScotland might do that, but even in Salmond's version it requires perfection - a perfection that no economic plan has ever succeeded in delivering.

And that iScotland will carry more costs, such as 1% extra of GDP lost to debt interest payments - which equates as tory austerity cuts to Scottish public services (unless you'll all be paying higher taxes?).

----

I was rather disappointed in two aspects of last night's programme.

The first was currency, where nothing of what a currency actually is was mentioned.

The second was that there was no mention of the banking issues - where whichever way it pans out impacts hugely badly onto iScotland (either a mass of job losses, or a huge loss of tax income; both severely damage iScotland financially), and which is a scenario I've yet to see factored into anyone's economic projections for iScotland.

Cos what isn't going to happen with Scotland's banks in the case of independence is everything remaining the same.

Edited July 8, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I see that Salmond has been doing his Kim Jong-il impression again, this time to Scotland's bankers (the same bankers he used to laud as Scotland's future )

Just so that your head doesn't explode over the Kim thing, I'll remind you what Darling actually said (rather than what WoS, BC, etc, would like you to believe)....

"[salmond] said on the BBC that people voted Ukip in Scotland because English TV was being beamed into Scotland. This was a North Korean response. This is something that Kim Jong-il would say."

Here's Kim-il-Salmond in action...

Alex Salmond 'personally pressurised financial body to drop independence report'

Anyone might think he doesn't want *YOU* to know the truth of things. Fancy that, you voting for indy on the basis of lies.

[LJS]

This seems to be the latest "No" tactic to claim that all sorts of business folk are being intimidated to stop them voicing their concerns. You can see it's working ... All these companies & organisations cowering in terror & saying nothing.

Frankly sounds like load of tosh to me.

...or you can believe the telegraph.

Edited July 8, 2014 by LJS

[eFestivals]

This seems to be the latest "No" tactic to claim that all sorts of business folk are being intimidated to stop them voicing their concerns. You can see it's working ... All these companies & organisations cowering in terror & saying nothing.

Frankly sounds like load of tosh to me.

...or you can believe the telegraph.

Alex had a convo with that organisation and some members about indy, which he admits having.

WTF would that organisation fabricate the content of that conversation? Why gains the most by lies, them or Alex?

But yeah, everyone else is a liar, but Alex the proven liar never is.

Edited July 8, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Meanwhile, back the ranch, yes-ers will not ...

1. say what a currency is and how it gets its value.

2. commit to paying more in taxes to the rUK if required as a consequence of the CU they demand.

3. tackle Alex about his lies over the constitution.

4. tackle Alex about the lies within the constitution.

5. actually take the sovereignty they say is theirs.

[Comfy Bean]

Meanwhile back in the real world, I`ve just returned from 4 days at a wee festival on the west coast of Scotland. Much talk of Independence both round the campfires and by the artists. A real enthusiasm and belief that we can manage to do things for ourselves and improve our tiny corner of the world free from the policies of Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg, Alexander etc.

The Saturday night headliner ( Bombskare ) asked for a show of hands and I`d go with approx 90% YES. The band spoke with real passion and enthusiasm about how " we " could make Scotland a better, fairer place for all to roars of approval. For fairness, I noticed they were all sporting the yes badges on their suits and I am talking about a small sample of folk, approx. 1500. I did not see wee Eck hiding in any bushes handing out the badges with that smug look on his coupon.

Same thing happened at the Arran folk festival a few weeks back. Loads of great songs and poems and all the indy chat was in great humour as there are always plenty of good english folk on Arran !

The fact that we have so much already in place ( Parliament, health service, our universities etc ) seems to be moving some of our group from don`t knows last summer towards yes. It`s not as if we are starting from scratch although start up costs will of course be high. It`s all about the ( very ) long term gain though surely.

Neil, I know you believe that we are all racist, right wing etc but can all these people at the festivals be like that ? and what about Patrick Harvie and the Greens.....are they all racists and right wing as well ?

I agree with some of your stuff on tax and the Bank stuff is clearly an issue. As has been said, lets vote on Independence first. In the event of a YES vote ALL parties will need to shuffle their pack and set out how they would tackle the many many issues that will lie ahead of us. It will not be all about Alex....no matter how many times you say otherwise

[eFestivals]

Meanwhile back in the real world, I`ve just returned from 4 days at a wee festival on the west coast of Scotland. Much talk of Independence both round the campfires and by the artists. A real enthusiasm and belief that we can manage to do things for ourselves and improve our tiny corner of the world free from the policies of Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg, Alexander etc.

That's rather priceless.

For those wishes to come true, that nationalist plan must be a dictatorship.

The Saturday night headliner ( Bombskare ) asked for a show of hands and I`d go with approx 90% YES.

with no peer pressure, of course.

The band spoke with real passion and enthusiasm about how " we " could make Scotland a better, fairer place for all to roars of approval.

Lovely nice words.

Haven't you noticed that Clegg and Cameron both claimed they'd make the UK a "better, fairer place for all" too, and they both claim to have succeeded. Have they?

I'd guess you'd say they haven't and I'd agree, but that's by-the-by.

I'm merely pointing out that they said the same thing as those you've cheered. What matters is the substance, not the nice words.

Can iScotland actually deliver - in the real-world - itself the "better, fairer place for all" you envisage?

Will iScotland vote itself higher taxes? Every indicator says not.

Meanwhile....

It's already failing to live up to those nice words you cheered when it offers you no greater sovereignty over the political class than Westminster gives you.

And guess what? Once those politicians hold your sovereignty you can't take it back from those politicians; you're 100% dependent on those politicians giving it back.

So hadn't you better do something quickly, to ensure your "better, fairer place for all"?

Or are they just empty words and what is important in twonking the nose of England Westminster?

The fact that we have so much already in place ( Parliament, health service, our universities etc )

I';d thought Scotland had a lot in place until the other day when I saw a list of the huge number of things which Scotland doesn't have in place (wish I'd kept a link now). It's a very long and very expensive list.

Neil, I know you believe that we are all racist, right wing etc but can all these people at the festivals be like that ? and what about Patrick Harvie and the Greens.....are they all racists and right wing as well ?

I don't think the SNP are particularly right wing. I'm merely pointing out that they're not the left-leaning wet dream that many yes voters like to believe they'll be getting.

I'm far from convinced that the SNP are racist either, tho it's plain to see that they're happy to use racism where necessary to their political advantage.

And I certainly don't think the idea of independence is one that's owned by any point of the political spectrum. Politics is about holding power, and if a politician sees indy as the way they'll hold the most power then it's hardly surprising to see politicians reconcile themselves to the idea.

But nationalism - ethnic or civic - is bollocks. It's not where the decision is taken, it's the quality of the decision and the environment that decision plays itself out in compared to the the other choices. This is the real world, not a theoretical perfect one.

And there's almost nothing I'm seeing that's good about the proposed indy. It's led by a charlatan who is never held to account by those who might vote in support of him, and if it were to be won there would not be a unified nation to take the project forward to its best conclusion.

Even the best-hoped-for EU plans are laughable. The EEC/EC/EU has never given a single opt-out to a new member, and currently Montenegro is being refused entry for being in *exactly* the position that is planned for iScotland (no central bank).

(and that's before getting the desire of the markets to see true EU commitment to the Euro, with absolute commitments with timeframes from new members to joining the Euro).

If Scotland is going to do indy (and I expect it will do in the near-ish future, tho it's not looking likely for this year) then I reckon Scotland needs to be better ready for it - both emotionally, intellectually, and practically. As far as it goes, this year has probably been a decent learning curve, that shows just how un-ready for it Scotland is, but can be learned from.

If it's a no, Scotland needs to start building up all of the instruments of statehood that it needs - many of which don't actually need permission from Westminster to exist (tho they might not be legally 'sovereign' over a UK-wide equivalent).

It's a cost tho, so higher taxes. Acceptance of those higher taxes will be a part of the maturity needed to make indy work well, so even that would be a positive step towards that indy future.

I agree with some of your stuff on tax and the Bank stuff is clearly an issue. As has been said, lets vote on Independence first. In the event of a YES vote ALL parties will need to shuffle their pack and set out how they would tackle the many many issues that will lie ahead of us. It will not be all about Alex....no matter how many times you say otherwise

In the event of a yes vote, Alex does everything without you having any say over it.

That is an absolute fact, and one he's stated with absolute clarity in the draft constitution.

If yes-ers don't hold sovereignty over Alex before empowering him, then you can be damned sure they never will do afterwards.

Edited July 8, 2014 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

with no peer pressure, of course.

I accept that. Was just trying to give a feel of the festival crowd and how a " large " majority appear to hold the opposite view to your own. My point remains though. At the 2 festivals I`ve been at up here there is a " general " feel that the momentum is behind YES. As I`ve said before, I think it will go with NO but I`m happy that the gap does feel as if it is narrowing.

You mentioned above that Cameron and Clegg are quite possibly full of shit. Think we would pretty much all agree with that. At the same time though you seem to believe that they honestly want " us " to stay in team UK as it would be better for us and they are worried about what will happen to us if we have the cheek to try and go it alone and you are agreeing with them. Do you really think they give a shit about the people of Scotland ? Why do they really want Scotland ?

Some hold the view ( I don`t ) that London and Scotland hold everything else together and it`s easier to hang on to Scotland than bother with fixing the other stuff.

Are they concerned about what would happen to the ownership of Scotlands coastline ? Who knows. I just don`t believe for a second that Dave is actually worried about a fairer future for the people of Scotland. I`m pretty sure we would be more likely to get that if the decisions were in our own hands.

Better together winks Dave. No wonder he won`t come up and have a debate on WHY he wants us

[eFestivals]

there is a " general " feel that the momentum is behind YES. As I`ve said before, I think it will go with NO but I`m happy that the gap does feel as if it is narrowing.

If there is momentum, then there doesn't seem to be enough.

But the polls suggest that the momentum has already gone, and it's already a busted flush.

You mentioned above that Cameron and Clegg are quite possibly full of shit. Think we would pretty much all agree with that. At the same time though you seem to believe that they honestly want " us " to stay in team UK as it would be better for us and they are worried about what will happen to us if we have the cheek to try and go it alone and you are agreeing with them.

I'm agreeing with their final conclusion, but for completely different reasons.

You know, in much the same way as so many yes-ers say they're not supporting Salmond*.

(* which I accept they genuinely mean, tho the point is from my side they're still *actively* endorsing all the bits of his plans they say they don't agree with, and *actively* empowering him to take those actions and claim democratic legitimacy for them).

Some hold the view ( I don`t ) that London and Scotland hold everything else together and it`s easier to hang on to Scotland than bother with fixing the other stuff.

Are they concerned about what would happen to the ownership of Scotlands coastline ? Who knows. I just don`t believe for a second that Dave is actually worried about a fairer future for the people of Scotland. I`m pretty sure we would be more likely to get that if the decisions were in our own hands.

And that's where the victim complex has kicked in.

Anyone who thinks Cameron thinks he'll take the piss out of Scotland (just because it's Scotland) greater than he will anywhere else really needs a big reality check.

Tho, if that's really happening, it's more likely to be the result of the devolution you've voted for than anything else. It puts a fact of division there in black and white, and allows any divide to grow. It gets used by Salmond all the time, so it's hardly surprising that Westminster might start to use the same trick.

He puts himself and his buddies above the general public, but that's a different thing and exceedingly hard to eliminate from politicians of all shades. It's a trait Alex shares with Dave Moron.

Better together winks Dave. No wonder he won`t come up and have a debate on WHY he wants us

You still don't get it, do you?

He's got no case-for-change that he wants to make*.

(* note: that's a different thing to whether he's prepared to make changes or not).

It's Alex who is making the case-for-change, in exactly the way the people of Scotland asked him to.

I'm no fan of Cameron, but just because someone has an opinion different to Alex's it doesn't mean they're required to debate-or-die against him.

Alex says he can make a case and convince the people of Scotland of it.

The only person stopping Alex succeeding at that is himself. Get on with Alex, and stop with the racist bullshit ("scared Englanders" [and yes, it's para-phrased]) you're trying to use to win.

Edited July 8, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Alex will now be praying to the panda god, so he make an announcement before voting day.

Actually, he'll make one anyway. Anyone wanna take me up on a fiver chariteee bet that a pregnancy will be announced before voting day, and that no panda will ever come of it?

[LJS]

Alex had a convo with that organisation and some members about indy, which he admits having.

WTF would that organisation fabricate the content of that conversation? Why gains the most by lies, them or Alex?

But yeah, everyone else is a liar, but Alex the proven liar never is.

Oh, look! They forgot to intimidate the university of Glasgow

http://m.scotsman.com/news/anton-muscatelli-no-sign-of-debate-intimidation-1-3468544#ptlink.fid=14492&isc=1&did=12d4d8798ce852c1192a2b5a803eb3fcc7fa2707&ctp=article

How careless!

[LJS]

Thinking of starting a new thread ..."the yes campaign is founded on racism & Alex Salmond is a tin pot dictator and the vote is all about him" so Neil can rant on with his delusional view of the debate there & perhaps we can then have a reasonable discussion here.

[eFestivals]

Thinking of starting a new thread ..."the yes campaign is founded on racism & Alex Salmond is a tin pot dictator and the vote is all about him" so Neil can rant on with his delusional view of the debate there & perhaps we can then have a reasonable discussion here.

If you can't see the racist undertones to much of what Salmond does then you're missing an awful lot.

As I said above, I don't particularly think they mean it. But they're not going to avoid going that way and so lose 10%+ of the support they could have, are they?

As for the "tin pot dictator" bit you say above, you're missing the point entirely. You want to believe you're voting for honest Alex, the man who earnestly believes in the sovereignty of the people of Scotland.

Yet he's a man who believes in their sovereignty so little that he doesn't trust them to make up their own mind on basis of the evidence and views around them by trying to suppress evidence and views that go against him, and neither does he trust 'the people' enough to allow them the smallest smidgen of power with which to over-rule the political class (or more specifically, he doesn't allow the Scottish people to have any power over Alex).

And who hides those facts behind the worthless words that say "the people are sovereign" and which then denies them any sovereignty (as proven by the rest of the constitution).

Edited July 9, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Oh, look! They forgot to intimidate the university of Glasgow

http://m.scotsman.com/news/anton-muscatelli-no-sign-of-debate-intimidation-1-3468544#ptlink.fid=14492&isc=1&did=12d4d8798ce852c1192a2b5a803eb3fcc7fa2707&ctp=article

How careless!

Breaking news: murderer fails to murder every other person alive.

[LJS]

If you can't see the racist undertones to much of what Salmond does then you're missing an awful lot.

As I said above, I don't particularly think they mean it. But they're not going to avoid going that way and so lose 10%+ of the support they could have, are they?

As for the "tin pot dictator" bit you say above, you're missing the point entirely. You want to believe you're voting for honest Alex, the man who earnestly believes in the sovereignty of the people of Scotland.

Yet he's a man who believes in their sovereignty so little that he doesn't trust them to make up their own mind on basis of the evidence and views around them by trying to suppress evidence and views that go against him, and neither does he trust 'the people' enough to allow them the smallest smidgen of power with which to over-rule the political class (or more specifically, he doesn't allow the Scottish people to have any power over Alex).

And who hides those facts behind the worthless words that say "the people are sovereign" and which then denies them any sovereignty (as proven by the rest of the constitution).

Racist my effing arse.

I think there is more racism to be concerned about with Ukip's influence on Tory policy in the UK, frankly. Not that the Tory party doesn't already have a nasty streak.

Not voting for Alex. Funnily enough he's not standing in the referendum.

[eFestivals]

Racist my effing arse.

it's there. Pretend otherwise if you want to.

I think there is more racism to be concerned about with Ukip's influence on Tory policy in the UK, frankly. Not that the Tory party doesn't already have a nasty streak.

I don't particularly disagree with that.

But it changes nothing about what the SNP do.

Not voting for Alex. Funnily enough he's not standing in the referendum.

Care to tell me what of the indy plans is not Alex's plans?

Care to tell me when you get a say over Alex's plans to stop Alex's plans?

You are not only voting for indy, you're voting for a whole lot more than that - and every jot of it is at the behest of just Alex.

And there's not a jot of "the people are sovereign".

Edited July 9, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

it's there. Pretend otherwise if you want to.

I don't particularly disagree with that.

But it changes nothing about what the SNP do.

Care to tell me what of the indy plans is not Alex's plans?

Care to tell me when you get a say over Alex's plans to stop Alex's plans?

You are not only voting for indy, you're voting for a whole lot more than that - and every jot of it is at the behest of just Alex.

And there's not a jot of "the people are sovereign".

Tell you what, I'll take my chances with your alleged Scottish racism over UK torykip racism.

& of course whether Alex gets his own way on everything depends on whether he keeps his promise to assemble a team Scotland for the post Indy negotiations & how much authority he gives that team. No need to canvas your view on that.

I happen to think it will be in his interests to stick to his promise & go for as much consensus as possible.

[LJS]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-voters-previously-against-yes-vote-explain-why-they-changed-their-minds-9593134.html

The 3rd guy in this article demonstrates how Scotland can be more successful run from Scotland.

[eFestivals]

Tell you what, I'll take my chances with your alleged Scottish racism over UK torykip racism.

but you've said you believe you'll be getting something better. Drawing the line in a different place and doing all the same things is not anything better.

Don't forget that your choice comes with significant and unavoidable downsides, because a small state is more vulnerable to crisis (triggered either inside or out) than a larger state.

That means that to come out with the same average result, a small state needs to be better run.

& of course whether Alex gets his own way on everything depends on whether he keeps his promise to assemble a team Scotland for the post Indy negotiations & how much authority he gives that team. No need to canvas your view on that.

I happen to think it will be in his interests to stick to his promise & go for as much consensus as possible.

It's already detailed in the draft constitution. You appear to have missed it.

To paraphrase what that draft constitution says, it says "Alex gets the final say over everything".

Not the people.

[eFestivals]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-voters-previously-against-yes-vote-explain-why-they-changed-their-minds-9593134.html

The 3rd guy in this article demonstrates how Scotland can be more successful run from Scotland.

Yesterday we had a brief discussion about how politicians mutter lovely but meaningless words. That's the white paper, that the first has swallowed whole.

The second believes in Alex believing in the Scottish people. She's clearly not read (or understood) his constitution where he makes clear he believes in the political class more than he does the people.

The third has spoken with the SNP, and is convinced that that Alex will rain jam from the sky to benefit Scotland - exactly the things he's not been doing with the powers he already has. Instead he's used the powers he has to increase the numbers in poverty in Scotland (the opposite to the rest of the UK).

The fourth wants to believe all at Westminster are liars, apart from one bloke he can't name who he puts complete belief in for Scotland's future.

The fifth hasn't done the sums for himself, and believes a false scenario he's been fed by 'yes' is true.

It's inspiring, isn't it?

[LJS]

Posted Today, 11:13 AM

LJS, on 09 Jul 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Tell you what, I'll take my chances with your alleged Scottish racism over UK torykip racism.

but you've said you believe you'll be getting something better. Drawing the line in a different place and doing all the same things is not anything better.

Don't forget that your choice comes with significant and unavoidable downsides, because a small state is more vulnerable to crisis (triggered either inside or out) than a larger state.

That means that to come out with the same average result, a small state needs to be better run.

But we won't be doing all the same things because the racism you imagine is exactly that - Imaginary.

The Scottish government is not racist

the SNP is not racist

The official Yes campaign is not racist

Radical Independence campaign is not racist

Asians for Independence is not racist

English for Independence is not racist

women for Independence is not racist.

I could go on but I think you get my point

Let me be clear, I am not for a minute saying there is no racism in Scotland nor am i saying there are no racists - that would be bizarre. Nor am I saying that there are not Scots with an irrational hatred of the English. We would truly be a unique country if we could make those claims.

Scotland is of course not without our problems & we do have an "ism" which is much more problematic than racism & that is sectarianism. Despite George Galloway's claims that Catholics should fear a yes vote, the Scottish government has taken action to try & combat this.

Scottish independence: Orange Lodge registers to campaign for a 'No' vote

Continue reading the main story

The Grand Orange Lodge has registered as a "permitted participant" in the Scottish referendum campaign
.

Funnily enough this group's contribution does not appear to have been welcomed with open arms on the "No" side.

On a more serious note, I do not accuse any but the most extreme (& unofficial) edges of the "No" campaign of racism. It is not an accusation I bandy about lightly.

Edited July 9, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

Yesterday we had a brief discussion about how politicians mutter lovely but meaningless words. That's the white paper, that the first has swallowed whole.

The second believes in Alex believing in the Scottish people. She's clearly not read (or understood) his constitution where he makes clear he believes in the political class more than he does the people.

The third has spoken with the SNP, and is convinced that that Alex will rain jam from the sky to benefit Scotland - exactly the things he's not been doing with the powers he already has. Instead he's used the powers he has to increase the numbers in poverty in Scotland (the opposite to the rest of the UK).

The fourth wants to believe all at Westminster are liars, apart from one bloke he can't name who he puts complete belief in for Scotland's future.

The fifth hasn't done the sums for himself, and believes a false scenario he's been fed by 'yes' is true.

It's inspiring, isn't it?

Whilst not necessarily wholeheartedly agreeing with your points on number 1,2,4&5 it was number 3 I was speaking of.

Your interpretation of what he said is extraordinary & just reveals the inbuilt bias that you claim you are free from.

Here's what he said

“I’ve never been active politically – I’ve voted for every political party, depending on the policies being touted at the time, whichever one I thought suited my family or my business best. I’m a fiercely patriotic Scot, but to me that doesn’t mean that we have to be separate from the UK, because I’ll be Scottish no matter what.

So when it came to independence at first I was basically a No, because I’ve always had a healthy disrespect for the ability of politicians: these days they go to college and learn how to avoid questions and go straight into party politics.

“But when the latest SNP government came in, we started getting invitations to go and speak to them as a business about what was affecting us and were asked whether the money they were trying to invest was actually making any difference on the ground.

“That was a bit of a revelation for me, because we’ve never been visited by any politicians from Westminster of any note and certainly never been asked for our opinions – we’re a small business in a very outlying part of the UK, so we’re not really on the radar.

“That’s when I started thinking maybe if we did have politicians in Scotland who were making decisions, things might work better.

“And when I started looking into it a bit more – into how little say we actually have in the policies that are made – that began to sway it.

“For me this is a business decision – I’ve got no emotional drive for independence and I’m quite happy being part of the UK, if the UK can run better. But with every fact I learned, I moved more and more towards a Yes, because the economic facts are quite staggering as to how much we’ve been either overlooked or disadvantaged by the fact that policies are made on a national basis.”

Here's your take on that

The third has spoken with the SNP, and is convinced that that Alex will rain jam from the sky to benefit Scotland - exactly the things he's not been doing with the powers he already has. Instead he's used the powers he has to increase the numbers in poverty in Scotland (the opposite to the rest of the UK).

& just on a side point, talk me through the measures alex has taken to actively increase poverty in Scotland.

[LJS]

Tougher than Tories pledge will help No camp - MP

http://m.scotsman.com/news/uk/tougher-than-tories-pledge-will-help-no-camp-mp-1-3471496

What a choice!

I cannot begin to put into words how much the Labour party has disappointed me. What exactly the fuck is the point of the Labour party? & this Is the only realistic alternative to the Tories to govern the UK.

Stop the union bus, I want to get off!

...& yes Neil, it will be better in iSCO

[eFestivals]

But we won't be doing all the same things because the racism you imagine is exactly that - Imaginary.

Nope. The SNP won't stop their racism win or lose. Nothing if ever their fault, it's always the fault of those nasty foreigners.

And you've never noticed this?

If you got many of Farage's speeches and changed 'UK' to 'Scotland' and 'EU' to 'UK' and then read the words to many yes voters they'd cheer those words.

On a more serious note, I do not accuse any but the most extreme (& unofficial) edges of the "No" campaign of racism. It is not an accusation I bandy about lightly.

It's not an accusation I bandy about lightly either. I use it only when i see it.