It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Deputy Leader of UK calls Scots Extremists

page: 17
18
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by clanger
 


Well put. I was just trying to be a wee bit more polite but clearly I wasn't getting through.




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by YeshuaPiso
 



Off course an easy way for the British Government to end the independence calls would be to:
Let Scotland gather ALL taxes ,revenue an independent Scotland would gather if independent and present us with a bill for our contribution to the British Army and any other join costs incurred?



They wont though? I wonder why ,perhaps they know when we found out just how well off we are we would definitely vote independence and it would come in double quick time..



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by clanger
 


As has been revealed by all their covered-up 'accounting'.

Even their own recent figures showed that amongst British regions, Scotland contributes the third highest per capita to GDP after London and the South East.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by clanger

You are obviously a half wit,perhaps you should have been educated in Scotland.
Great Britain =England and Scotland(Wales are a principality of England)
no Scotland = England no Great Britain
The united Kingdom is Great Britain+Northern Ireland(a Province) aka
The United Kingdom of great Britain and Northern Ireland (check your passport)

simples explanation
www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk...


I


Semantics over the name, since England, Wales and Cornwall reside over the majority of the Island of Great Britain, no reason to change it, but it could be altered to the less PC, UK of England and Northern Ireland.

Regardless, the remaining parts of the UK would still be formed from the United Kingdoms of England and (what remains of the 'kingdom' of) Ireland.

Fact still remains we would still be called the UK and be EU members, hold our permanent seat at the UN etc and the Kingdom of Scotland would have to apply for EU membership.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by YeshuaPiso
anges that. Please check with a reputable source.

As for the racism charge, I'm not entirely clear where I've ever said anything derogatory about any race - or, for that matter, any nationality (English, Welsh or Irish). As a Scotsman, with two English grandfathers, three English sons, a Welsh great-grandmother and with both grandmothers' families originating in Ireland (North and South), I am as much a child of these islands as anyone.

You will withdraw that characterisation.



I made no direct accusation at you personally, just a reflection of the Scottish people I have met over recent years unfortunately....but if the cap fits!



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Those English people here who argue for the union with Scotland seem to be the same ones most adamantly against union with Europe. And the arguments they use for union with one are the same ones they rubbish against union with the other.

Poor little English pushmepullyous ! They argue against everything. They just want their little kingdom to stay the same, with red telephone boxes and the Queen's head on stamps, Twiggy passing by in a Mini Cooper, little cups of tea to break the monotony.

Aww, my poor little rosbifs, time for *European hugs*.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by caerloyw
 


Not semantics. Factual constitutional position but I'm glad you've made an implicit admission that you were wrong.

And Northern Ireland is still not a Kingdom.

edit on 10-1-2012 by YeshuaPiso because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
Those English people here who argue for the union with Scotland seem to be the same ones most adamantly against union with Europe. And the arguments they use for union with one are the same ones they rubbish against union with the other.

Poor little English pushmepullyous ! They argue against everything. They just want their little kingdom to stay the same, with red telephone boxes and the Queen's head on stamps, Twiggy passing by in a Mini Cooper, little cups of tea to break the monotony.

Aww, my poor little rosbifs, time for *European hugs*.

Dear Friend, you know nothing.







posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by caerloyw
 


If the cap fits....???

So, it was actually a generalisation against all Scots? Bit racist, innit?



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by caerloyw

Originally posted by clanger

You are obviously a half wit,perhaps you should have been educated in Scotland.
Great Britain =England and Scotland(Wales are a principality of England)
no Scotland = England no Great Britain
The united Kingdom is Great Britain+Northern Ireland(a Province) aka
The United Kingdom of great Britain and Northern Ireland (check your passport)

simples explanation
www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk...


I


Semantics over the name, since England, Wales and Cornwall reside over the majority of the Island of Great Britain, no reason to change it, but it could be altered to the less PC, UK of England and Northern Ireland.

Regardless, the remaining parts of the UK would still be formed from the United Kingdoms of England and (what remains of the 'kingdom' of) Ireland.

Fact still remains we would still be called the UK and be EU members, hold our permanent seat at the UN etc and the Kingdom of Scotland would have to apply for EU membership.


Perhaps your flag of the new England/Wales/n Ireland triumphant?

i468.photobucket.com...







edit on 10-1-2012 by clanger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by caerloyw

Originally posted by clanger

You are obviously a half wit,perhaps you should have been educated in Scotland.
Great Britain =England and Scotland(Wales are a principality of England)
no Scotland = England no Great Britain
The united Kingdom is Great Britain+Northern Ireland(a Province) aka
The United Kingdom of great Britain and Northern Ireland (check your passport)

simples explanation
www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk...


I


Semantics over the name, since England, Wales and Cornwall reside over the majority of the Island of Great Britain, no reason to change it, but it could be altered to the less PC, UK of England and Northern Ireland.

Regardless, the remaining parts of the UK would still be formed from the United Kingdoms of England and (what remains of the 'kingdom' of) Ireland.

Fact still remains we would still be called the UK and be EU members, hold our permanent seat at the UN etc and the Kingdom of Scotland would have to apply for EU membership.



So, the rest of the UK should now be called (using your logic) - The Kingdom of England (including Wales) United with What Remains of the Kingdom of Ireland.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
They have a majority in Parliament, they can do what they want - When asked why they didn't just declare independence they stated "We want to have the mandate of the Scottish people to do that" - Basically useless rhetoric. I'm not displaying anything.

Also - GB would not cease to exist in name, while it would not be the same GB they're not going to change their name, and even if the name was changed - We would still be a member of the UN and EU (as we get the lion share of everything with Scotland being a junior partner with us).

I'd also like to add.

I'm half Scottish, my whole of my dads family are from Glasgow -
I'm against breaking up Britain as I see myself as British, so do many other people - We have been partners in crime for over 300 years, we have a long and rich shared history.

While we have many influences from the mainland of Europe, we are not connected by land, our cultures and history is not one of togetherness and longevity and prosperity which lets face it the history of those within the United Kingdom is.

Yes there was resistance to this over 300 years ago, i think the Jacobite rebellion is the last time anything really kicked off and that was to bring back a joint English and Scottish Monarch, which happened about 300 years ago.
(I am excluding Ireland in this).

Culturally we are a lot more connected than we are with mainland Europe (i am not talkin about our origins so don't cite Normandy/Saxon invasions which happened over 1000 years ago). I don't see why something which has worked for over 300+ years should stop taking place, the EU is a baby not even out of nappies compared to Great Britain - GB is older than the country of North America.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by YeshuaPiso
 


On this point about the UK ceasing to exist, I totally agree with you and you're right on every point.

As you have said, the United Kingdom refers to the Union of the Crowns of Scotland and England. If it ceases to be a unified political entity, then the UK could not then claim to be the UK.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by RebellionOutlaw
They have a majority in Parliament, they can do what they want - When asked why they didn't just declare independence they stated "We want to have the mandate of the Scottish people to do that" - Basically useless rhetoric. I'm not displaying anything.

Also - GB would not cease to exist in name, while it would not be the same GB they're not going to change their name, and even if the name was changed - We would still be a member of the UN and EU (as we get the lion share of everything with Scotland being a junior partner with us).

I'd also like to add.

I'm half Scottish, my whole of my dads family are from Glasgow -
I'm against breaking up Britain as I see myself as British, so do many other people - We have been partners in crime for over 300 years, we have a long and rich shared history.

While we have many influences from the mainland of Europe, we are not connected by land, our cultures and history is not one of togetherness and longevity and prosperity which lets face it the history of those within the United Kingdom is.

Yes there was resistance to this over 300 years ago, i think the Jacobite rebellion is the last time anything really kicked off and that was to bring back a joint English and Scottish Monarch, which happened about 300 years ago.
(I am excluding Ireland in this).

Culturally we are a lot more connected than we are with mainland Europe (i am not talkin about our origins so don't cite Normandy/Saxon invasions which happened over 1000 years ago). I don't see why something which has worked for over 300+ years should stop taking place, the EU is a baby not even out of nappies compared to Great Britain - GB is older than the country of North America.


Jacobite Rebellions.

Actually you shouldn't exclude Ireland. It was to reinstate our rightful monarchs - not the Dutch and German impostors who have been on the throne since.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Hi Stu

Although we disagree on some points (although perhaps fewer than you think), I was certain that you would at least know the constitutional position.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by caerloyw
 


Northern Ireland isn't a seperate Kingdom, it's a province of the UK. Without Scotland, the name would be the Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland.

As that rodent says, simples.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by malcr

Originally posted by RebellionOutlaw
reply to post by malcr
 


Nice post Mal, I agree with most of the points raised excluding the final one.
.

I'm entitled to a belief


One thing I missed off. Not all the oil fields are Scottish. The current "splitting" of the North Sea is done by equidistance from coastlines despite the SNP claims it should be horizontal. Simply look at what parts are Danish, norwegian etc and its all equidistanct (EU ruling not G Brown or T Blair). So if Scotland is independant some the southerly fields are actually in English waters (Berwick is very very far north level with South Glasgow !!!!!). This has a significant detrimental impact on the finances of Scotland hence why the SNP getting very agitated about it. Which is quite ironic considering their support of EU membership!


Scots Law, which is the internationally recognised law sytem of Scotland dictates the waters of Scotland. The oil fields that are producing and have produced oil, 95% of them are in Scottish Waters.

Please read this...

legislation.gov.uk

And see image below...


edit on 10/1/12 by jrmcleod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by RebellionOutlaw
Also - GB would not cease to exist in name, while it would not be the same GB they're not going to change their name, and even if the name was changed - We would still be a member of the UN and EU (as we get the lion share of everything with Scotland being a junior partner with us).


No, GB wouldn't but it also wouldn't be a political entity. GB is the name of the island we live on, it is the Greater of the British Isles. It isn't some assumption of arrogance on our part, but simply a geological fact.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jrmcleod
 


Oh come on, not this again....

I showed you a map pages back showing the locations of the fields and there is almost half in clearly English waters, even by your own map!



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join