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.

 

A Question to the Scot's Here on ATS? ....

page: 11
10
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Soloprotocol
I was wondering when this would turn into a Irish/Catholic/Protestant train wreck...it only took to page 8 or so....leave it out please.


My bad!

Although, the whole reason Scotland joined the United Kingdom (not talking about the union of the crowns) was to *ensure* there would be no Catholic monarch.

Kind of hard to leave it out of the idea of an independent Scotland if you don't look at the history of how Scotland came to be part in of the union in the first place.




posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by jrmcleod
 


As it stands, the current "No" vote is hovering at around 40%. In order to swing it to the yes camp, you would first have to hope all of the 25% or so undecided ALL went for the Yes vote and hope that some of the "certain No's" change their minds.

Personally, I reckon the vote will go 60-40 in favour of staying in the Union, which is pretty much how most polls for the past 30 years have shaped up.

For the Yes camp to win would require a good chunk of the No voters to simply not bother, but then that would call into question the legitimacy of the vote if less than 50% of the population took part.

There lies the cunning of the SNP plan, I think because they don't have a minimum threshold for the vote - in theory, if everyone forgot and one guy in the Highlands voted Yes, the Yes vote wins.

As it stands after the White paper was released, the Yes camp has 38% while the No camp has 49%. There is 15% up for grabs and it would take a monumental effort, plus divine intervention, for the Yes to swing it. It's possible, I give you that and if they pulled it off, then fair play. I just hope you haven't got to excited over a Yes result because it is looking pretty slim.
edit on 27/11/13 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Pffft...

Scotland had a fine crop of physicians, scientists, inventors, businessmen AND ol' Robert Burns .

I would mention the Tobacco Lords and the Merchants but like... they are a bit of ill repute...



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Freeborn
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 




It's not even about religion, it's about two football teams and this is where it gets ludicrous.. seriously...


Believe it or not but I'm a Celtic fan, (one day I'll relate the story behind that), I've been to Parkhead on many an occasion including Auld Firm games and I know exactly how ridiculous, ludicrous and to an outsider how surreal it all is.
And there is no getting away from it there is definitely an element of religious bigotry involved - on both sides.

As a rule of thumb the English tend to view religion as very much a private matter and something not to be broadcast in public - overtly religious people are more often than not viewed as cranks and nut-jobs.
It is simply beyond comprehension that religion could be allowed to interfere with things as important as football and politics.


Scotland is a lot bigger than Rangers and Celtic, something the west coast conveniently forgets. We have Aberdeen, Dundee, Inverness, the Borders, the Western Isles, Orkney, Shetland, etc. Not everywhere in Scotland is contaminated by religious idiocy, sorry bigotry. And a lot of Scots are women (we can vote too!), where football plays a minimal part in our lives. I'm not having a go at you, just giving a different opinion.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by auroraaus
 


I am well aware of "the crop" of Scottish scientists, poets etc, but the vast majority lived after 1707 (in fact, the best and brightest were 19th century types) in a world they helped forge by being part of the UK and British Empire. (Such as those Tobacco Lords you mentioned - wouldn't have been Lords of anything without the Empire)

Could they have done so well in a Scotland that was bankrupt and left alone in 1707 instead of having access to the worlds largest Empire and trading system? Maybe, but I would doubt it.
edit on 27/11/13 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Ah, but would that also not be due to the industrial revolution? Not just of empire?

As for the Tobacco Lords and Merchants, that would be pre-1707.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:40 AM
link   

jrmcleod

DrunkYogi
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


Your so naive it's unbelievable. I bet your a kilt swinger and bagpipe blower.


If anyone is naive its you. And yes he may very well be a "kilt swinger and bagpipe blower" but so am i...and i would love to know why the derogatory comments have to come into it? Or is it because of your armchair general mentality? Or possibly because your English and think of yourself as "above all others" (most likely).

I'll tell you what - I'd rather be a "kilt swinger and bagpipe blower" than a national of any other nation! This country and these people are the nicest there are, with one of the most vibrant and proud histories this world has seen. Not to mention the benefits this country has given the world, even for its small population size


Im Scottish mate! So i guess your argument is bunk. I just cannot be bothered with Salmond and his kilt swinging mob stirring up trouble amongst ordinary people when Governments are to blame. His Government would be even worse than Parliment. It's the same for all of us little people all over Britain, don't be so naive as to think this # stirrer would be any different. I see your Clan Mcleod does this make you feel different or special in some way? the stupid Clans have a lot to answer for. get out of the dark ages!



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by jrmcleod
 




It's funny how France and Germany are always mentioned as the success ....lol

A success that is bound to be, after all they are the innovators of the whole concept

of the EU.

But one size never fits all the same, look at Ireland, Greece, Spain and Italy

to mention a few .... it certainly hasn't been good for them!


I wonder if Alex Salmond will do with Scotland what the EU did to Ireland - keep on

voting till they come up with the required answer!?



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:41 AM
link   

auroraaus
Ah, but would that also not be due to the industrial revolution? Not just of empire?


Not really. Had the Scottish not been part of the UK at the advent of the IR and also had access to the trade the Empire brought, you'd most likely have remained economical stagnated well into the 19th century as a result of the disastrous Dalian Scheme which led to Scotland joining the Union in the first place.


auroraaus
As for the Tobacco Lords and Merchants, that would be pre-1707.


No, they weren't. They rose precisely because Scotland joined the Union, which gave them access to the English colonial markets, specifically North America. Before the Union, they had no such access, so explain your reasoning if you think otherwise.

Tobacco Lords - easy Wiki link



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Was not the Industrial Revolution precipitated by the invention of the steam engine???

James Watt.

And fair point on the Tobacco Lords, you are quite right.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by beansidhe
 


I think you've either mistook me or I'm just rubbish at getting my point across.
I'm aware there's far more to Scotland than Glasgow / Edinburgh and that for most outside of that adjoining belt the bigotry displayed is as alien to them as it is to most of us in England.

The point was that for too many religion / football / politics all tend to blur into one and their beliefs or opinions on one cloud their beliefs or opinions on the others.

I suppose those outside of the two major cities may view the Glasgow / Edinburgh centric nature of Scottish politics etc in some way like those of us outside of the South East view the way the London / Home Counties centric nature of UK / English politics etc.
If Scotland does vote for independence it'll be interesting to see how that develops - I know The Shetlands and some of the other Islanders have a deep suspicion and distrust of most things Glasgow / Edinburgh.

I'm also aware that elements from The Northern Isles have expressed a wish to be allowed their Right To Self-Determination if Scotland votes for independence as they have no desire to be a part of it and feel little in common with those from the mainland.
I wonder if that feeling grows the SNP or whoever was in power would grant them that wish......and what about the oil then?



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by auroraaus
 


Mr Watt was born quite some time after the Union and had to team up with Matthew Boulton, and Englishman, to get his idea's off the ground.

As I was saying, I doubt that Scotland would have done quite so well with it's inventors had it been outside the Union and without access to the markets such as the ones which made the Tobacco Lords stupidly wealthy.

EDIT: It's also worth noting that Watt wasn't the "inventor" of the Steam engine, he merely improved upon previous designs, such as Thomas Newcomen's Engine (he was English - ssshhhhh)
edit on 27/11/13 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by auroraaus
 

Duke of Bavaria!!!! Wow! OK, I'll have a look at this latter when I get back from a christmas fair I'm doing.
Thank you
Rainbows
Jane



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:27 AM
link   
As the decision on who should be Ruler is usually based on one king or queen defeating another, i propose, even though i'm not a king or queen, nor do i have any royal blood in me whatsoever, to fight her majesty in a stripped to the waist, square go for the title of Scotland's head of state.... winner takes all...

edit on 27-11-2013 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


Oooh dear.... That's a fight you might lose - after all, the sight of Her Maj stripped to the waist is enough to send any man running, Scots or English!



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:39 AM
link   

stumason
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


Oooh dear.... That's a fight you might lose - after all, the sight of Her Maj stripped to the waist is enough to send any man running, Scots or English!

You underestimate me...Have you seen me stripped to the waist...She would be in awe at my ripped torso, so much so that she would drop her guard just long enough for me to deliver the Coup de Grace...



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


No, no it's me who's rubbish! I was agreeing with you.
You raise a good point about the islanders though. I think the white paper is an attempt for Scotland to work together, rural and urban, and see how things go from there. It's a small point, but take for example the issue of putting the clocks back and forwards. Shetland et al are criticised for advocating this as Southern England can't really see their point. In an independent Scotland we can work together so that the mainland and islanders have an equal say in how our country is run. That would be my hope, anyway.
How things turn out in reality is a different story, perhaps. I haven't even finished reading the white paper yet. It seems like it needs a lot of discussion. Plus the fact that everything could change after our first election, only weeks after Scotland achieves independence (if it does).
I hope it does.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
www.bbc.co.uk...

debate in on live now btw, those interested.

They seems to be talking a lot about oil...

I wonder what they say about production and the way its fallen from just under 3 million barrels a day in 1999 to about 1,25 million barrels in 2014. What about outer Islands, the Orkneys and Shetlands, what if they don't want to leave the UK?

They have been talking about the average joining time for new EU states is eight years not 18 months. Scotland having to re-apply for EU membership. Scotland cannot even approach the EU until it has finished negotiations with the UK.



Ms Davidson details all the issues which will have to be dealt with in the planned 18 months between the referendum and the proposed independence day.

edit on 27-11-2013 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by tdk84
 


It's stuff like this that annoys me about the SNP - the total bollocks they come out with...



SNP MSP Marco Biagi says the UK Prime Minister David Cameron stands in the House of Commons in front of 300 cheering MPs. He says one of those - just one - was elected in Scotland. That's not democracy, Mr Biagi says. The UK government's policies are being done to us and not by us, says Mr Biagi.


Firstly, it isn't true. There are actually 11 Lib Dem MP's and 1 Conservative MP, so that makes 12 "in Government", not 1.

Secondly, under the last Government, there were a total of 39 Scottish Labour MP's, representing 11% of the seats "in Government" when Scotland only has 9% of the Population, not to mention the last two PM's were Scottish...

Thirdly, the Scots are actually (and historically even more so) over-represented in the Westminster Parliament as a relation to their population.

This is precisely what I mean about them cherry picking and they can't even do that properly.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Soloprotocol
I was wondering when this would turn into a Irish/Catholic/Protestant train wreck...it only took to page 8 or so....leave it out please.


Here are two banners that where flown at the Celtic game last night. Now you can hopefully see where i am coming from. There is a definite underlying religious issue to do with the SNP independence issue.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk...



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join