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.

 

The white paper on Scotlands Independence

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   

alldaylong
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


A SNP politician on Radio 4 earlier ( I think his name was Sweeney) stated that if Scotland gains independence, the interests rates in Scotland would still be set by the Bank Of England.
The interviewer asked if the Bank Of England says No, what does the SNP have in mind for a Plan B. He had no answer to the question.



The SNP want a 'currency union' whereby we keep the pound. There is no plan B at the moment. But since the white paper was just released today, Swinney will have to toe the party line. There has not been a response from the Bank of England yet, as far as I know.
Here's a summarised version of the white paper: summary
edit on 26-11-2013 by beansidhe because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Let me wade in here as a Yorkshireman living in Scotland. I will be voting for independence despite knowing that Scotland will be financially worse off in the short term (it will be better off in the long term when, hopefully, if it extends Keynesian economics). It is not out of spite but as someone has already intimated the rest of Britain is ruled from a London centric Tory lunacy that is rolling back the state for ideological reasons. How many times do we have to highlight cases where private is bad and public is much much better before the English turkeys stop voting for Xmas. Scotland and the north of England would be much better off without these lunatics.

Having said that there is an interesting question :

Do the people of Scotland have the right to vote for their own independence given the reason why the union was formed in the first place?

When you look at the history of the union then it should really be the English-Wales government that decides the terms of and possibility of independence. For those unwilling to read or more likely those who think Braveheart is real (oh dear how sad). Scotland was bankrupted by the Lairds due to failed expeditions to the Americas (called the Darien Scheme). They went cap in hand to the English parliament who bailed them out at the expense of the loss of independence. Scotland is the ONLY nation in the history of mankind that has sold its independence for money.

Surely it is the debtee who has the right to decide not the debtor.........hmmmmm



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Hi Free.
I hear you. Believe me, I hear you.
We've had quite a few conversations between us regarding Scotland, the NE, Independence etc. and I know that we don't always agree on every small point. But I know that your heart is true to your beliefs, and that you can smell BS from a million miles away!
So, I thank you for your kind words.
I really do appreciate it.

I have an idea... why don't you come join us?


G



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   


Do the people of Scotland have the right to vote for their own independence given the reason why the union was formed in the first place? When you look at the history of the union then it should really be the English-Wales government that decides the terms of and possibility of independence. For those unwilling to read or more likely those who think Braveheart is real (oh dear how sad). Scotland was bankrupted by the Lairds due to failed expeditions to the Americas (called the Darien Scheme). They went cap in hand to the English parliament who bailed them out at the expense of the loss of independence. Scotland is the ONLY nation in the history of mankind that has sold its independence for money. Surely it is the debtee who has the right to decide not the debtor.........hmmmmm
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 


Do the people of Scotland have the right? hmm...
English-Wales government?????
Braveheart? Are you talking about the Mel Gibson Movie??
The Darien Scheme... really? That's why Scotland shouldn't be "allowed" self-determination? A failed colony from over 300 years ago???

Thank you.
You have reminded me why this has to happen.
Keep up the good work!!



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 


You highlight genuine fears I, and many others, have about the direction Cameron is taking us - I firmly believe his, and obviously those whose agenda he is pushing, has every intention of taking this country back to something akin to Victorian like society along with all the injustices and inequalities that went with it.
In previous threads I have stated I genuinely fear that a vote for Scottish independence will consign England and the rest of the UK to a Tory government for the foreseeable future. I admit that is a purely selfish reason for hoping the Yes campaign fails.
I firmly believe we have a better chance of turning this island / Union into something we can all be proud of by remaining together - personally I'd like to see increased devolved power to all the regions of the UK within some sort of Federal framework and with radical reform of electoral and parliamentary procedures, (a discussion for another time and place I suspect).

I understand why Scotland would wish to take it's chances alone given the direction we are going, I just believe there are better options than outright independence.

People may ask why I have such passionate views on this, but only a fool thinks that Scottish independence will not have ramifications for the rest of the UK.

Scotland has reaped many benefits from The Union. Many within the Yes campaign try to portray The Union as some sort of oppression of the Scottish people - that is an insult and so wide of the mark.
Sure, they have also suffered, but not all of that suffering has been the doing of those damned English, some of it has been of their own doing.

But surely the answer doesn't lie in the past - we could argue the toss forever and a day about historical events and the positives and negatives of The Union, the important thing is Scotland has to decide what is best for itself in the future and that should be based on facts and not a misguided romantic notion of 'freedom'.

reply to post by Gordi The Drummer
 


And thank you for your kind words.

I think we share a common desire to see a progressive, caring, vibrant nation free from the shackles of those who constantly seek to control and exploit, it's just we differ on how to get there.



I have an idea... why don't you come join us?


I don't think you realise how tempting that is - but I am both English and British and always will be.
edit on 26/11/13 by Freeborn because: spelling



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


To both Soloprotocol and Gordi the drummer.

You both have very strong cases and it is for the best that it is for the people of scotland to make the decision as it will be there children that have to bear the burden of there decision, still I can but see the UK as a ship with a broken back that will sink with a handful of old people still singing rule britania but then you are both correct about the Tory Scumbags and there insanity of selfish greed, there corrupt grabbing of national assets so that they can sell them off and have there equity management friends buy them up such as the Royal Mail and yes never through privatisation have we received a better deal, the water out of the tap is now filth and the private water companys neglect the drainage ditches causing flooding, the power companys are that greedy they are killing old folks and the poor and the public transport is lost to all intents and purposes with the roads due to be sold off next thank to the Thatcherite ideals that divided britain between everything north of birmingham being poorer and all the money being invested south of birmingham in the 1980, the real problem with UK politics is the lack of a true proportional representation and if we had one the TORYS would hardly have been in power since the war if at all, but then I for one can not see the difference between new Labour and Thatcherite Toryism.

Sadly I have to admit if I lived north of the border I would be sorely tempted to vote YES but I live south of the border about 60 miles south of carlisle and see as yourselves and others do in that the Torys in England will have a free reign over england there after, I actually like Alex salmond though I would never trust him he is a true politician (because he is a politician) rather than that bunch of moronic self serving ass lickers in westminster but in an ideal world he would be the leader of the labour party (the real labour party not the blairite corruption we now have) and I think he does genuinely care about the scottish nation and her people.

My pain is that I have always seen myself as BRITISH not english or scottish but BRITISH and no I have no affiliation to the BNP or should we call them moselys brown shirts.

You in scotland do have an opportunity with only 4 million to make a truly democratic government and remember if it had not been for the bloody land clearences there would be at least 28 million scots, of course most of cumbria and merseyside and tyneside have very strong ancestral ties with scotland as these were places were many scots came as was manchester during the industrial revolution and many more English than realize are of Scot extraction.

I Think that scotland will likely vote independance through though I do know of a few scots whom I speak to from time to time down here whom say otherwise, what I personaly like about Salmond though most of all is that 'that confidence trickster Ponce eton boy salesman with the fat face and too much over inflated self worth cameron whom ignores other peoples arguments even when he knows he is blatantly wrong' never had the guts to meet him face to face for a very long time perhaps because he knew Salmond could see through him and had genuine arguments in favour of scottish independance.

Still I will lament the end of the union but then we are hardly allowed to fly the flag for fear of offending someone under the political correctness gone mad that has infected the country.

And I agree whole heartedly Soloprotocol "NO MORE WARS" unless they are genuinely in our own defence and not to serve a bunch of corporate interests and the city of london with its corrupt Rothschilds.

edit on 26-11-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 

and
reply to post by LABTECH767
 


Guys, I am delighted to report that I couldn't agree more with you both.
Excellent points, well reasoned and well written.

...and yes FREE - I actually do consider us to be "kindred spirits" when it comes to these topics!

I also consider myself to be British by the way.
AND I will still be British even if Scotland goes it alone, because I come from the Island of Great Britain at the heart of the British Isles.

The way I look at it; We in Scotland actually have the opportunity to do something about the London-centric economic policies of the current UK government. We can democratically vote to leave the POLITICAL union with London. The breaking up of the actual union of nations with our English Welsh and NI friends, neighbours and Family is unfortunately a horrible but necessary by-product of that situation, but we can still be strong friends and allies.

You know what will happen if we DON'T vote for Independence?

Nothing.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 04:19 AM
link   
You know what, Us Scots are sleeping here....we should ALL be Voting for Independence or at least sending out a signal to Westminster we will be voting for independence unless you give us a Better deal. Westminster is Bricking it if the people say yes to Independence because THEY Haven't thought of plan B.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


Bullseye!

That's the point, really isn't it? There's no plan B for Westminister and in their typical arrogance they think we wouldn't dare walk away. They're starting to wake up to the fact they need Scotland's economic input, tourism etc etc and they're panicking.
There's definitely some noses out of joint that Scotland is allowed- and I mean allowed- a conversation, never mind independence.
But the bottom line is that it is us who get to vote, and everyone is entitled to their opinion in the meantime. They can say anything they like, but we're voting!



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


Why would Westminster have a Plan B?
It's straight forward, vote for independence or don't - it's your choice and that's what you wanted or are you now saying that Westminster should somehow try to bribe the Scottish people?

If you vote to stay in the UK then you have the option to try to change the whole of the UK into something you can be proud of - vote for independence and you get the chance to try and turn Scotland into something different.
You're choice, straight forward.

It's the SNP who are sadly lacking any Plan B's.

Who took away the devo-max option?



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


How do we change the UK into something we can be proud of? What would that look like?
A lot of people in Scotland - and England too- feel that Westminster, and specifically a Tory government, DOES NOT LISTEN to Scotland, or to be blunt, give two #'s about Scotland.

It might seem selfish of us to run. Maybe we are being unfair to the rest of the UK. But sometimes enough is enough.



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


London and the Home Counties most definitely do not need Scotland's input about anything - they will survive and prosper no matter, do not be under any illusion about that.
If anyone will suffer due to a Yes vote you can bet your house on it that it'll be the regions; Wales, Northern Ireland, North East, North West etc.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


You're right, we both know you are. So do we say # it, let's all suffer together? What's the point, London will always be at the forefront of Britain, let's give up.
If anything, an independent Scotland can inspire the UK to have the heart to try something different.
Ideally we can help. Actually, we should help.

This is a chance to try something different, and I want to grab it with both hands, not so I can turn my back on the horrible English (they're not, obviously) but to try and move away from something that just isn't working.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by beansidhe
 


I've made my feelings about Westminster and the London centric nature of English and UK politics / society / culture etc pretty clear several times.
And I've posted on numerous occasions what I personally would like to see.
But this isn't about me delivering my own personal 'white paper' on my vision of a progressive, vibrant yet compassionate Union of equal partners is it.

It's about Scotland's options.

And personally I think there's strength in numbers, that we stand a far better chance of effecting positive change standing together and that we should focus on the many things that unite us rather than the few that divide us.

I don't begrudge Scotland the opportunity it is having to debate and express it's right to self-determination - I just personally believe that total independence wouldn't be the best option for Scotland and it's people or the UK as a whole.

And I accept that part of that reasoning is from a purely selfish perspective - if Scotland chooses independence then that will condemn the rest of the UK and England to a Tory government for the foreseeable future, something that would prove devastating to the North East.
edit on 29/11/13 by Freeborn because: grammar and clarity



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


It would leave a bitter taste for the NE, particularly. No one in Scotland with a brain would deny that. And that does, if I'm honest, bring forward a sense of shame, of desertion.

Plan B should be to redefine our borders. Would 'tiny England' do as a regional title?
Just trying to cheer us up, no offense meant x



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by beansidhe
 


And no offence taken - I'm thick skinned, have broad shoulders and am far too old and ugly to be offended by such things.

No matter what I feel about London and the Home Counties I am English and British and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Scotland shouldn't feel shamed or embarrassed about having the debate and vote - it's right that it should.
I just hope it makes its decision based on facts and not half-truths, mis-guided notions of freedom and a dislike of the English.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


I can agree with that and respect that. You put forward some very convincing arguments against independence which are calm, reasonable and well thought out.
I don't know if independence will happen. Will a hatred of the 'auld enemy' play a part? Probably for some, if I'm honest. As for half truths, let's agree to disagree. I see the white paper as part of a long conversation, and it's very early days. Anything can happen in just under a year.

Sometimes the momentum for change is enough to carry forward more than it intended. God knows, most of us are arguing over the same thing - regions destroyed by Tory mismanagement, neglect and ignorance.
Anyway, I've said enough on this whole matter.
Best wishes.



posted on Dec, 3 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   

LABTECH767
reply to post by Soloprotocol
 


Do you really believe once they have there control that these politicians will be any better than the scoundrels in westminster because if you are right then on behalf of the rest of the united kingdom I petition to replace westminster with Hollyrood#


Hear hear!


ancient hatred againt the sassanax should really be ancient hatred against the normans and that means the aristocracy both south and north of the border.


I may be wrong but as I understood it from my Highland ex wife the terms was applied by the Highlanders to the Lowlanders. Possibly because they were well mixed in with the Anglo-Saxons? Note also that the Normas were actually descendents of the Vikings! Oh what a mixed lot we all are!


It was the picts not the scots whom defeated the hardened roman legion and when you look at a claymore look closely as it is nothing less than a development of the late Viking long sword and is almost identical to its sister from europe the bastard sword.


Yup, Picts were Vikings and the purest 'British' blood, as in the blood of the Brythonic tribes, is found in Connemara. But all of the tribes were descendants of the Celts who ere basically neighbours of the Saxons who were actually descendants of the Celts and round and round we go!


I have always been proud of the scots and my ties to them but now I see petty little men tearing the union apart and part of me want to reciprocate weather they be south or north of the border, we are one unified nation but a house divided will never stand.


Indeed, and if I may so very well put. Having married a Highlander and lived in the highlands, and now living in the Republic of Ireland and of Welsh descent this whole BS about roots is complete nonsense as we are, as DNA proves, all a grand mix of many 'races' and none, not one single one, is an original inhabitant of the "British Isles" as in the geographic area. This is how the world works. It seems to me that globalisation pulls us all further apart with each small country/faction wanting to break away and split things into smaller and smaller groups.

Perhaps we will get back to tribal wars soon? Or maybe we can make that wars between different towns and villages like it used to be? Darn it, I think I shall just have to declare my 9.5 acres a Kingdom and defend it against all comers and only use my own Rule of Law. How long would I last?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join