Scotland

[Nonc Hilaire]

[Torchwood]

I think a single malt government for Scotland would naturally be more representative. Why wouldn't any country want to escape the parasitic influence of the EU/NATO control system at this point.

But the Scots are keen on the EU, while the English are not....

[Nonc Hilaire]

I think a single malt government for Scotland would naturally be more representative. Why wouldn't any country want to escape the parasitic influence of the EU/NATO control system at this point.

But the Scots are keen on the EU, while the English are not....

In that case, they should put on some pants and sober up.

[Alexis]

What really baffles me is that simple question... WHY do about half of Scots want their region to become a separate country?

I mean:

- London is not exactly the head of a totalitarian regime, so it's not for freedom or basic rights

- Economy? As I understand, that can be argued both ways, which in itself proves that if there is an economic benefit to independence (that's an if), then it is a small one

- Identity? But what exactly would threaten Scottish identity: nothing at all, it would seem, except for...

- Language? Well, this is a topic where no Scottish identity is to be defended, because the Scots abandoned it long ago. Gaelic is spoken by maybe 1% of Scotland's population. It was made official language of the region on equal footing with English, yes, lip service is cheap... But as for really learning and using it, Scots would rather die!

There are far more Breton speakers in Brittany than there are Gaelic speakers in Scotland. Yet independentists are marginal among Bretons.

There is a very sizable contingent of independentists in Québec, yes... but then, this one has its distinct language, which is spoken in actuality not just given an empty official status. And even then, it seems less Québecois are independentists than Scots.

Really: Why this yearn for independence?

[Endovelico]

Independence, freedom, sovereignty are also emotional issues. You can't handle them only on a rational basis. If I were a Scot I would definitely be in favour of independence. Being ruled only by people whom one has voted for. No interference from another Parliament. Not risking having people sent to fight wars only because the government in London said so. Not being in NATO against one's wishes. Not being forced to harbour nuclear weapons in our neighbourhood against our wishes. Not risking having public health services degraded. And so on... Definitely, Yes to independence!...

[Nonc Hilaire]

All that North Sea oil is an important factor.

[Simple Minded]

What really baffles me is that simple question... WHY do about half of Scots want their region to become a separate country?

I mean:

- London is not exactly the head of a totalitarian regime, so it's not for freedom or basic rights

- Economy? As I understand, that can be argued both ways, which in itself proves that if there is an economic benefit to independence (that's an if), then it is a small one

- Identity? But what exactly would threaten Scottish identity: nothing at all, it would seem, except for...

- Language? Well, this is a topic where no Scottish identity is to be defended, because the Scots abandoned it long ago. Gaelic is spoken by maybe 1% of Scotland's population. It was made official language of the region on equal footing with English, yes, lip service is cheap... But as for really learning and using it, Scots would rather die!

There are far more Breton speakers in Brittany than there are Gaelic speakers in Scotland. Yet independentists are marginal among Bretons.

There is a very sizable contingent of independentists in Québec, yes... but then, this one has its distinct language, which is spoken in actuality not just given an empty official status. And even then, it seems less Québecois are independentists than Scots.

Really: Why this yearn for independence?

social mood is a big part.

[Simple Minded]

All that North Sea oil is an important factor.

That definitely I$ part of the calculation$. But probably not the whole $hebang.

Ideology i$ often a $ub$et of $

[Alexis]

The leader of a Québec sovereignist party warns Scots that promises from London of greater autonomy after the vote will not be held and will come to naugh if Scotland votes "No" (link in French)

«This is no fear campaign, this is no exaggeration: based on our experience, you will be in worse situation if you vote No», as he says in English.

The leader of Option nationale recalls the promises by Canada in 1995, just as the great «Love in» in Montréal days before the vote. (...) He lists then a series of «backward moves» for Québec after the two referendums.

«Voting No gave us the worse of both worlds», according to Sol Zanetti.

Should we update Marx to Independentists of All Countries, Unite?

[monster_gardener]

Independence, freedom, sovereignty are also emotional issues. You can't handle them only on a rational basis. If I were a Scot I would definitely be in favour of independence. Being ruled only by people whom one has voted for. No interference from another Parliament. Not risking having people sent to fight wars only because the government in London said so. Not being in NATO against one's wishes. Not being forced to harbour nuclear weapons in our neighbourhood against our wishes. Not risking having public health services degraded. And so on... Definitely, Yes to independence!...

Thank You Very Much for your post, Endovelico.

Not being forced to harbour nuclear weapons in our neighbourhood against our wishes.

IMO, if the Scots do decide to go independent, they better make sure they get their fair share of Britain's nukes...

Ukraine made the dumb Liberal Progressive Mistake of ditching its Soviet nukes and is paying the DumbAss oops I mean DonBass price for doing that....

I suspect that even the Talented Mr. Putin would hesitate to try to purloin part of a Nation with Nukes...

Plus the nukes could be used as fuel for spaceships to set up Sustainable Scottish Colonies in Outer Space


As to the rest.....

Let's do Portugal next....

Break it up into provinces and perhaps even counties.....

In any case, break it into statelets small enough so that crazy, Sharia or other Weird Minded, people can take it over piece by piece....


A Hindu version of this almost happened once in the US where devotees of a guru intent on taking over a small town spread salmonella infectious disease at restaurants to tamper with an important vote....

The 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack was the food poisoning of 751 individuals in The Dalles, Oregon, United States, through the deliberate contamination of salad bars at ten local restaurants with salmonella. A leading group of followers of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (later known as Osho) had hoped to incapacitate the voting population of the city so that their own candidates would win the 1984 Wasco County elections.[2] The incident was the first and single largest bioterrorist attack in United States history.[3][4] The attack is one of only two confirmed terrorist uses of biological weapons to harm humans since 1945.[5]

Having previously gained political control of Antelope, Oregon, Rajneesh's followers based in nearby Rajneeshpuram, Oregon, sought election to two of the three seats on the Wasco County Circuit Court that were up for election in November 1984. Fearing they would not gain enough votes, Rajneeshpuram officials decided to incapacitate voters in The Dalles, the largest population center in Wasco County. The chosen biological agent was Salmonella enterica Typhimurium, which was first delivered through glasses of water to two County Commissioners and then, on a larger scale, at salad bars and in salad dressing.

751 people contracted salmonellosis as a result of the attack; 45 of them were hospitalized. There were no fatalities. Although an initial investigation by the Oregon Public Health Division and the Centers for Disease Control did not rule out deliberate contamination, the agents and fact of contamination were only discovered a year later. On February 28, 1985, Congressman James H. Weaver gave a speech in the United States House of Representatives in which he "accused the Rajneeshees of sprinkling salmonella culture on salad bar ingredients in eight restaurants".[6] At a press conference in September 1985, Rajneesh accused several of his followers of participation in this and other crimes, including an aborted plan in 1985 to assassinate a United States Attorney, and he asked State and Federal authorities to investigate.[7] Oregon Attorney General David B. Frohnmayer set up an Interagency Task Force, composed of Oregon State Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and executed search warrants in Rajneeshpuram. A sample of bacteria matching the contaminant that had sickened the town residents was found in a Rajneeshpuram medical laboratory. Two leading Rajneeshpuram officials were convicted on charges of attempted murder and served 29 months of 20-year sentences in a minimum-security federal prison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_Rajne ... ror_attack

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/justice ... -1.1373864

[monster_gardener]

Thank You Very MUCH for your post, Nonc Hilaire.....

Pregnant with what?

Something good.....

Or

Something bad....

[Doc]

Scottish independence vote takes an ominous turn

Scottish independence battle draws 'day of reckoning' warning to business

By Guy Faulconbridge and Angus MacSwan

EDINBURGH Sat Sep 13, 2014 10:56am EDT


Loyalists march past a Union flag during a pro-Union rally in Edinburgh, Scotland September 13, 2014. REUTERS/Dylan Martinez

1 of 11. Loyalists march past a Union flag during a pro-Union rally in Edinburgh, Scotland September 13, 2014.

(Reuters) - The campaign battle over Scottish independence took a bitter turn on Saturday when a senior nationalist warned businesses such as BP that they could face punishment for voicing concern over the impact of secession.

With the fate of the United Kingdom on a knife edge, the economic future of Scotland has become one the most fiercely debated issues less than six days before Scots decide on whether to break away.

Nationalists accuse British Prime Minister David Cameron of coordinating a scare campaign by business leaders aimed at spooking voters while unionists say separation is fraught with financial and economic uncertainty.

But former Scottish Nationalist Party deputy leader Jim Sillars went much further than separatist leader Alex Salmond, warning that BP's operations in Scotland might face nationalization if Scots voted for secession on Sept. 18.

"This referendum is about power, and when we get a 'Yes' majority we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks," Sillars, a nationalist rival of Salmond's, was quoted by Scottish media as saying.

"BP, in an independent Scotland, will need to learn the meaning of nationalization, in part or in whole, as it has in other countries who have not been as soft as we have been forced to be," Sillars said.

When asked about the comments in a BBC radio interview on Saturday, Sillars confirmed he had raised the prospect of nationalization but said he had used the term to get media coverage and that nationalization was not on the table.

A spokesman for BP declined to comment. A spokeswoman for the Scottish nationalists could not be reached for comment.

The boss of BP, Bob Dudley, has said that Scottish independence could cause his company "uncertainties" and that he did not want to see Scotland drifting away.

"The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland's poor poorer through lies and distortions," Sillars was quoted in Scottish media as saying. "The power they have now to subvert our democracy will come to an end with a 'Yes'."

In an extraordinarily strong attack on business, Sillars also said banks such as Standard Life would face tougher employment laws after a vote for independence.

Major banks, oil companies and supermarkets have said that a vote for secession would create concern: North Sea oil would have to be divided up while there is uncertainty over the future currency and central bank of an independent Scotland.

DEUTSCHE BANK WARNING

Deutsche Bank said a vote for independence would be a mistake akin to Winston Churchill's decision to return the pound to the Gold Standard or the failure of the Federal Reserve to provide sufficient liquidity to the U.S. banks, decisions that helped bring on the Great Depression.

"These decisions – well-intentioned as they were – contributed to years of depression and suffering and could have been avoided had alternative decisions been taken," David Folkerts-Landau, Deutsche's chief economist, said in a note to clients.

"Foreign investors come to Scotland because they rely on a predictable investment environment. All of this comes from a united Great Britain."

Such is the gravity of the situation that finance minister George Osborne, Britain's second most powerful man, canceled a trip to the G20 meeting in Cairns which takes place the weekend after the vote.

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney will leave the G20 meeting early to be back in Britain in time for the vote. The central bank has plans in place for a possible secession vote.

Investors pulled $27 billion out of UK financial assets last month - the biggest capital outflow since the Lehman crisis in 2008 - as concern mounted over the fate of the United Kingdom, a report by London-based consultancy CrossBorder Capital showed.

Until September, all polls but one in 2013 had shown the unionists with a comfortable lead but several surveys this month show the nationalists have won over hundreds of thousands of Scotland's 4 million voters.

Emotions are high.

Horrified at the prospect of the breakup of the United Kingdom, thousands of loyalists from Northern Ireland and Scotland marched through central Edinburgh.

Armed with drums, flutes, banners, bowler hats and orange sashes, loyalists, named for their allegiance to the British throne, said the vote threatened their culture.

"It's your own history being taken away from you. What will you tell your grandchildren?" said Jim Prentice, a gardener wearing a Rangers soccer club shirt who had traveled from south of Glasgow to join the march.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/ ... MG20140913

[YMix]

Pregnant with what?

Something good.....

Or

Something bad....

Prince George has been a joy for proud parents Prince William and wife Kate, and now they're about to give him a sibling. The Duchess of Cambridge is expecting again, although like last time, the first few months of pregnancy haven't been easy for her.

[monster_gardener]

Pregnant with what?

Something good.....

Or

Something bad....

Prince George has been a joy for proud parents Prince William and wife Kate, and now they're about to give him a sibling. The Duchess of Cambridge is expecting again, although like last time, the first few months of pregnancy haven't been easy for her.

Thank You VERY MUCH for Your Reply and for Maintaining the Forum, YMix

Thanks for the explanation......

[Simple Minded]

Personally, I refuse to recognize the existence of sovereign nations in Europe, until the Europeans recognize the existence of more than one state in America.

Now if the Scots decide to become the 58th state of the US, that's OK with me.

[Alexis]

Personally, I refuse to recognize the existence of sovereign nations in Europe, until the Europeans recognize the existence of more than one state in America.

But we Yurpians do know that there is more than one State in America!

Most of us can list a fair number of those, such as: Canada, Brazil, Argentina, the US, Mexico, Columbia, etc.

[Nonc Hilaire]

Personally, I refuse to recognize the existence of sovereign nations in Europe, until the Europeans recognize the existence of more than one state in America.

But we Yurpians do know that there is more than one State in America!

Most of us can list a fair number of those, such as: Canada, Brazil, Argentina, the US, Mexico, Columbia, etc.

Don't forget the states of anxiety, despair and confusion.

[Simple Minded]

Personally, I refuse to recognize the existence of sovereign nations in Europe, until the Europeans recognize the existence of more than one state in America.

But we Yurpians do know that there is more than one State in America!

Most of us can list a fair number of those, such as: Canada, Brazil, Argentina, the US, Mexico, Columbia, etc.

Don't forget the states of anxiety, despair and confusion.

Now you sound like Zack always talking about how great the blue states are.....

[Simple Minded]

Personally, I refuse to recognize the existence of sovereign nations in Europe, until the Europeans recognize the existence of more than one state in America.

But we Yurpians do know that there is more than one State in America!

Most of us can list a fair number of those, such as: Canada, Brazil, Argentina, the US, Mexico, Columbia, etc.

You are obviously smarter than the average Yurpeon, such as Endo or Parodite......

[Simple Minded]

Question for Alex,

If the issue was "Should Scotland leave the UK?" What would the vote look like in England, Ireland, Wales, and France?

Since the French have long wanted to be part of the UK, we should give them a voice....

Maybe the rallying cry should be "Hey, remember who wears the pants in this Kingdom!"

[Nonc Hilaire]

Given the option, most people vote for independence.

[Endovelico]

I must confess that I'm afraid the Yes will not win in Scotland. It would be a great loss for all those who feel every nation should have a chance to become free and independent, and free to join with others, as equals, to promote regional or continental independence from imperialist minded countries. If Scotland becomes independent, several other European nations will follow their lead, and Europe will be less subject to domination by the larger powers. Nothing indicates that this independence movement will spread to France and Germany, where it is most needed, but one never knows. Occitania in France and Bavaria in Germany would be enough to stop any domination delusions by France or Germany over Europe.

Occitania



Bavaria

[Simple Minded]

It will be interesting to see the results of the Scottish vote by region.

Will the parts of Scotland that border England vote yes or no more than the remote regions?

If the goal is independence, why should Scotland remain as one nation instead of several?

[Endovelico]

It will be interesting to see the results of the Scottish vote by region.

Will the parts of Scotland that border England vote yes or no more than the remote regions?

If the goal is independence, why should Scotland remain as one nation instead of several?

Ask the Scots. It's all a matter of identity. If they feel they are one people, then they are one people and should be one nation and have one (sovereign) state. Logic has nothing to do with it...

[Alexis]

Nothing indicates that this independence movement will spread to France and Germany, where it is most needed, but one never knows. Occitania in France and Bavaria in Germany would be enough to stop any domination delusions by France or Germany over Europe.

I understand your concern about domination delusions from other countries, but regarding the most populated nations of Europe, you can rest securely, even with separatist movements in Occitan France or in German Bavaria as anecdotical as they are now.

The most basic and most solid protection againts domination delusions on the part of Germany, France, Britain or Italy is their more-or-less balanced demographics. No matter whether one looks present population or population below 20 (as a sign of the future), the largest among these four is no more than 1.5 times the smallest. This ensures that their balance-of-power relationship cannot be too much unbalanced.

Hence, for the lesser populated among European nations to be threatened by domination schemes from that direction, these four would have to agree between themselves on what they wanted to impose to the rest of Europe... Which, if history is any guide, including very recent history, is not going to happen tomorrow!



Speaking of which, if your real concern behind support to separatism is this one, you would be better supporting a united Britain. The UK sans Scotland would remain large enough to be a factor in this balance of 4 nations, but it would be a step in the bad direction of weakening one of these members, therefore making the balance a tad less stable.