What she probably means is "No chance of a referendum while the oil price is so low as our sums really wouldn't stack up.".
Alex Salmond: A second Scottish referendum is inevitible
- Thread starter Hades
- Start date
- Status
What she probably means is "No chance of a referendum while the oil price is so low as our sums really wouldn't stack up.".
Aye.
I seem to remember being told by Nationalists that any suggestion the oil price could go lower than the SNP's lowest figures (which were very optimistic) was Unionist scaremongering and that the likes of oil industry people who said the Yes campaign numbers were not necessarily reliable for oil prices were obviously wrong and didn't know as much about oil as the Yes campaign economist.
Strange how the price of oil which the Yes campaign financial forecast was reliant on didn't go the way they thought it would (I wonder if they'd got "the only way is uo" playing on a loop, as they certainly didn't remember the basic financial advice that the "value of stocks (and resources) can go down as well as up".
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,541
- Location
- Scotland
Still waiting for Mr Grumpy to discredit the Wings article.
Nor should they be, because they aren't responsible for locking people up.
I sat on a jury a few years back where I wholeheartedly believed the accused was guilty as hell. But I voted to acquit. Why? Because my judgement was that while I believed he was guilty, I could not conclude that the prosecution had proven that, beyond reasonable doubt. I was not surprised, however, when I found out that only about three weeks later, the same little ..... rascal, was caught red-handed doing exactly the same thing (burglary) again, in the exact same house. Having cleaned it out once, he waited for insurance to replace everything, and then went to clean it out again, unaware of a CCTV system and silent alarm.
The point is that the legal system protect the innocent by risking not punishing the guilty, short of a very high standard of proof. Press, on the other hand, are about reporting the story, as known and, if legally justified, implying or even stating the conclusions they draw, not following "beyond reasonable doubt". Even the legal system adopts a balance of probability standard in civil cases.
It's not just press, though. Politicians also face a public "smell test", because the public aren't required to adopt "innocent until proven guilty" for their representatives either. That's why, in the face of credible allegations, politicians are well advised to step back until guilt is proven, or not, and parties are well advised to distance themselves until the same point.
The EU have made it pretty clear that the member state is the UK, not Scotland, or England. If the UK leaves, the component parts of the UK are not members in their own right. For instance, neither Scotland nor England signed the treaties. The UK did.
Even if Scotland votes to leave the UK, whether the UK is an EU member or not, that doesn't make it an EU member, because the state that met EU acquisition criteria, and was measured and assessed to have done so, was the UK.
In many respects, Scotland would qualify for membership. In others, it wouldn't, but doing what was required to qualify wouldn't be hard, like creating a central bank with the necessary powers, but it would have to do so to meet those acquis criteria.
Could Scotland qualify? I don't see why not, given that those necessary steps to meet all the acquis criteria were taken.
But whether it'd be accepted or not, nobody knows until it happens, because nobody knows how other member states wil vote.
The one thing that is certain is that acceptance is not certain.
.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,541
- Location
- Scotland
Nothing is certain in this world! I think that the EU would be happy to have Scotland though.
Still waiting on Mr Grumpy's attempt to discredit the Wings article.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,528
What you mean like I am still waiting to hear your response to points I have made pages ago?
Did you forget or is the pot calling the kettle black again?
The whole "if Scotland votes to stay and England votes to leave the EU it will trigger an automatic referendum on independence - again!" is just more nationalist wishful thinking. Lovely thinks if he says it often enough people will accept it as a valid criteria.
EU referendum is a UK decision and has no reference to any division of voting into country's or any other arbitrary make it up as you go along sub division to try to serve others political aims. Scotland, England Wales and NI don't get separate votes any more than Cornwall, the Orkneys or Belfast do.
Scots voted to remain in the Union with a clear understanding and acceptance that would mean a vote on EU membership and as members of the Union agreed to be bound by its result. There is no provision for in the event of a vote to leave the EU Scotland to say "Oh we'd like to stay separately". Scotland would leave the EU along with the rest of the UK. If at some point in the future an Independent Scotland chose to re apply for EU membership that would be a matter for an independent Scotland at the time. Of course the idea of an independent Scotland outside of the rUK and EU is a nightmare for the nats as from a propaganda perspective it leaves Scotland potentially looking pretty isolated, something the majority are unlikely to vote for.
I wonder if in the event the majority of Scotland, Wales, NI and England vote to remain in the EU the rabid nats would accept that as support for the UK government and a massive vote for the status quo. no... thought not...
Still, I see the "I love the English, honest" Lovelyhead is still peddling the same tired old Scotland vs England crap.
EU referendum is a UK decision and has no reference to any division of voting into country's or any other arbitrary make it up as you go along sub division to try to serve others political aims. Scotland, England Wales and NI don't get separate votes any more than Cornwall, the Orkneys or Belfast do.
Scots voted to remain in the Union with a clear understanding and acceptance that would mean a vote on EU membership and as members of the Union agreed to be bound by its result. There is no provision for in the event of a vote to leave the EU Scotland to say "Oh we'd like to stay separately". Scotland would leave the EU along with the rest of the UK. If at some point in the future an Independent Scotland chose to re apply for EU membership that would be a matter for an independent Scotland at the time. Of course the idea of an independent Scotland outside of the rUK and EU is a nightmare for the nats as from a propaganda perspective it leaves Scotland potentially looking pretty isolated, something the majority are unlikely to vote for.
I wonder if in the event the majority of Scotland, Wales, NI and England vote to remain in the EU the rabid nats would accept that as support for the UK government and a massive vote for the status quo. no... thought not...
Still, I see the "I love the English, honest" Lovelyhead is still peddling the same tired old Scotland vs England crap.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,541
- Location
- Scotland
What you mean like I am still waiting to hear your response to points I have made pages ago?
Did you forget or is the pot calling the kettle black again?
You made the claim that Wings was untrustworthy. Back it up or shut up.
Another hour passes, Still nothing but tumbleweed!
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,528
Nope. I never made such a claim. Try again. I even put links to specific posts to help you out and everything.
Stop using facts to confuse the whole passive aggressive victim thing he has going on... He's a downtrodden patriot, you and your casual use of the truth is entirely unhelpful and synonymous with the fascist Westminster rule he has to endure because his fellow Scots apparently were too old or too confused to understand the question in the referendum.
Last edited:
This is truly an OcUk classic thread.
It's got all the components,on one side there is a poster who is passionate, slightly deranged and completely blind to any counter point to his argument who is doing all the leg work, pushing an agenda that nobody on here really cares about other than to satisfy their need for a bit of an argument. This poster will post meaningless data, opinion blogs, unverified statistics from unreliable sources for days and days at a time, completely unanswered, his efforts not just ignored, but regarded with complete indifference.
Then there is the opposition, a couple of three people who have a mild interest in the subject and a probably more than mild dislike of the of the opposition poster who semi regularly pop in, have a bit of a tit for tat about the issue in question, giving the opposite poster just enough encouragement to carry on dragging the corpse of this dead horse thread on for another couple of pages.
These threads have been known to go on for years, going round and round and round and round, only coming to an end when the mod team a sick of the sight of it and put it out of its misery, or one of the key figures on either side of the debate dies.
It's got all the components,on one side there is a poster who is passionate, slightly deranged and completely blind to any counter point to his argument who is doing all the leg work, pushing an agenda that nobody on here really cares about other than to satisfy their need for a bit of an argument. This poster will post meaningless data, opinion blogs, unverified statistics from unreliable sources for days and days at a time, completely unanswered, his efforts not just ignored, but regarded with complete indifference.
Then there is the opposition, a couple of three people who have a mild interest in the subject and a probably more than mild dislike of the of the opposition poster who semi regularly pop in, have a bit of a tit for tat about the issue in question, giving the opposite poster just enough encouragement to carry on dragging the corpse of this dead horse thread on for another couple of pages.
These threads have been known to go on for years, going round and round and round and round, only coming to an end when the mod team a sick of the sight of it and put it out of its misery, or one of the key figures on either side of the debate dies.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,541
- Location
- Scotland
Even the electoral commission are fed up of the unionist medias lies:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/timewaster-wastes-time/
Of course it's obviously not true because it is on Wings Over Scotland.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/timewaster-wastes-time/
Of course it's obviously not true because it is on Wings Over Scotland.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,784
- Location
- Auckland
It's like a watered down, more rubbish version of the 9/11 type threads except no one other than the OP actually cares and we have proof of build up and outcome.
Hopefully this one will also still be going in 14 years time when the OP will be one of the people whose opinion he belittles so much
If he then still believes in independence does it follow that we can then discount his opinion because he's old, stupid and misinformed?Mods - let's start a countdown clock!
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
It does say a lot about the standard of political journalism in Scotland when the electoral commission say that there is absolutely no evidence to support the stories, doesn't it?
Pretty simple. When there is a wide enough margin in the polling data consistently showing a majority for Yes then she will call a referendum.
WHen a party forms to stand on that policy platform, wins enough support within Dundee, carries out a referendum and wins it. Y'know...democracy.
The SNP always maintained that the proposed 18 month negotiation period post-referendum prior to actual independence was time enough to become a full member in it's own right given that all our laws already comply with EU legislation. This is a view supported by The Honorary Director General of the EC. This is the same man who negotiated the UK's entry into the EC and was involved in the applications of 14 other countries. I think he might actually know what he's talking about so will happily take his word over some partisan MSP, journalist or random on a PC parts website.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25965703
Pretty simple. When there is a wide enough margin in the polling data consistently showing a majority for Yes then she will call a referendum.
WHen a party forms to stand on that policy platform, wins enough support within Dundee, carries out a referendum and wins it. Y'know...democracy.
The SNP always maintained that the proposed 18 month negotiation period post-referendum prior to actual independence was time enough to become a full member in it's own right given that all our laws already comply with EU legislation. This is a view supported by The Honorary Director General of the EC. This is the same man who negotiated the UK's entry into the EC and was involved in the applications of 14 other countries. I think he might actually know what he's talking about so will happily take his word over some partisan MSP, journalist or random on a PC parts website.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25965703
Last edited:
- Status