Reply to: Support for Scottish independence rises after London warns on pound

[Mulder]

And only since 1930s Germany has been mentioned before, and neither myself nor the blog poster are in Germany.

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow Uni: Search results for 1930�s

Scottish independence: angry vile cybernats start hate campaign similar to the Nazi Party of 1930’s Germany, if this is the ‘talent’ available to Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, the public will get their chance to speak in 2014 at the ballot box

--

Scottish independence: Cybernats show their true colours as they resort to the same tactics used by the Nazis in the 1930’s Germany, smears, lies and poison is their stock in trade, their poison drips right through the independence campaign of Alex Salmond

--

Scottish independence: Sir Chris Hoy is called a “traitor” to Scotland by nationalists, in 1930’s Germany; the Nazis used the same tactics of smearing opponents to silence debate, the ugly face of Nationalism is Salmond and Sturgeon, grudge, grievance and malcontent

[Mulder]

Isn't it? Have you actually read the 'white paper'?

Lets see the Westminster campaign is currently based on Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) because it can't present a case based on economics. Whereas the white paper, thus far of what I've read, is largely based on economics for a small country.

Give it time Scotland will be the Andorra of the north.

The Westminster campaign is not currently based on Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD), that is what YesScot and SNP folk would like people to believe.

Whitepaper

Page 300:

Successive WM govts have failed to provide effective stewardship of Scotland's oils and gas resources.

Page 301:

"Through the success of the last five decades.."

".. international oil & gas centre of excellence..."

".. home to and industry that is leading the world..."

Which is it?



A comparison of the Whitepaper and the so called "FUD" from WM.

[Mulder]

This country fought & died for democracy. And now it is a farce? As I recall it was a land-side victory. No's were 20 points ahead of Yes a year ago, now their 10. Results come from a wide range of surveys including those who never voted in the election I'll bet.

"Westminster technically speak for Scotland however they do not represent the wishes of 99.9 of Scots."

FTFY

Sadly low turn out seems to be the enemy of democracy now.

More recent trend for Yes v No



Longer term trend for Yes v No



"Westminster technically speak for Scotland however they do not represent the wishes of 99.9 of Scots."
Really?

Based on what?

[scooterscot]

You wish! Andorra is much better at football!

Grrrr

[petergriffin]

Give it time Scotland will be the Andorra of the north.

You wish! Andorra is much better at football!

[doodab]

Give it time Scotland will be the Andorra of the north.

Well at least the skiing will improve then.

[MicrosoftBob]

Isn't it? Have you actually read the 'white paper'?

Lets see the King Alex campaign is currently based on Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) because it can't present a case based on a fairy tale white paper.

Give it time Scotland will be the Albania of the north.

FTFY

[scooterscot]

I would have more respect for their cause if their "vision" was more bold and actually aimed for independence, ironically this is what their own advisers recommend (including nobel prize winning economists), however SNP/YesScot know best (or realise most Scots don't want Indy and hence trying to say everything will still the same yet be better!).

Isn't it? Have you actually read the 'white paper'?

Lets see the Westminster campaign is currently based on Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) because it can't present a case based on economics. Whereas the white paper, thus far of what I've read, is largely based on economics for a small country.

Give it time Scotland will be the Andorra of the north.

[scooterscot]

Please try to remember that less than a 1/4 of eligible Scots voted for the SNP at Holyrood (almost 50% didn't vote at all).
Salmond & Sturgeon, and co represent a minority of Scots with approx £9M funding for YesScot & with taxpayers money they have managed to increase (from YouGov poll on 24/10/12 29%) to 35% (most recent YouGov poll). 29% seem to be an outlier on the low side. Support for Yes has remained pretty much constant in the 30 odd % range.

SNP technically speak for Scotland however they do not represent the wishes of a majority of Scots.

All this talk of Scots demonising Tories, SNP folk hate to be reminded that the Tory & SNP support is closer than they would like to admit.
2010 General Election
SNP 491,386
Tories 412,855

But sadly we need to remember that when discussing things with pro-Indy folk, generally YesScot/SNP, etc are always correct and it is the EC Presidents, Nobel prize winning economists (including the YesScots own advisers), etc that are wrong (Or are just bullying & bluffing).

Thankfully such attitude from YesScot/SNP is not being rewarded with a surge in support.

This country fought & died for democracy. And now it is a farce? As I recall it was a land-side victory. No's were 20 points ahead of Yes a year ago, now their 10. Results come from a wide range of surveys including those who never voted in the election I'll bet.

"Westminster technically speak for Scotland however they do not represent the wishes of 99.9 of Scots."

FTFY

[MicrosoftBob]

200 days until Scotland leaves and the really begins.....

But what if they're annoying and don't leave ?

[eek]

198 days 22 hours 17 minutes.....

200 days until Scotland leaves and the really begins.....

[Troll]

198 days 22 hours 17 minutes.....

[Mulder]

Independence clearly means something different north of the border.

Means the same to most of us north of the border, but clearly means dependence without representation to the SNP/YesScot bunch.

I would have more respect for their cause if their "vision" was more bold and actually aimed for independence, ironically this is what their own advisers recommend (including nobel prize winning economists), however SNP/YesScot know best (or realise most Scots don't want Indy and hence trying to say everything will still the same yet be better!).

[Mulder]

But that was the whole foundation of the British Empire. You Scots actually received preferential treatment. Think of the Irish and the Indians, killed in their hundred of thousands. Think of the concentration camps for the Boeren in SA.

You want to talk about imperialism, fine! But don't use Scotland as an example because you guys really had an easy time.

There is no way Scots were persecuted as a result of joining the UK.
Scottish Enlightenment happened because we joined the UK, with out "intellectuals" returning home.
Were very much part of the Empire building, Glasgow was 2nd city of the Empire (one of many apparently!), Dundee partially built on Jute.

YesScot/SNP folk who seriously think Scots have been oppressed and persecuted are literally deluded.

[Mulder]

And what happens to the next generation? And after that? In 100 years time, will Scots still get UK passports just because their great-grandparents didn't give up theirs?

It's almost as if the whole idea is crazy.

I am sure the answer is in the WhitePaper, whether or not the answer in the Whitepaper is workable or not is another question.
Sorry of course it is, SNP/YesScot are infallible, anyone who disagrees with them are just bullying or bluffing.