Guest Post by Jesse
What interested me the most in this article is not so much the information it provides on the campaign by the British establishment against the Scottish vote for independence, or the eager participants from the American members of the Anglo-American power clique as well.
Rather it is for the light that this article sheds on the behavior of the enablers of the Anglo-American establishment in the corporate media and the academy, and how rarified their experience of the daily lives of the people has become. It seems almost to be due to an imbalance of character and a fashionable failure of the national perspective. Understandable for the generation that proclaims, ‘greed is good.’
As David Brin has remarked, ‘It is said that power corrupts, but actually it’s more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power.’
I hope that whatever the result the vote turns out well for the people of Scotland. They will certainly have problems to encounter, and hardships as a people to overcome. As will we all.
There is a distance growing between the elite classes in America and England and the great majority of the people. It is palpable in the economic policies in the aftermath of the financial crisis.
I am always surprised by how little those pampered princes and princesses within the Beltway or Westminster seem to understand about their own people. What a caricature the communication and occasional interactions between them has become. Such distance breeds both mistrust and fear. It is becoming a cultural divide. And not just for the leadership itself, but for their vast assemblage of courtiers and sycophants who act as viceroys and interpreters for them.
It does not bode well for the future.
How the media shafted the people of Scotland
Journalists in their gilded circles are woefully out of touch with popular sentiment and shamefully slur any desire for change
By George Monbiot
Tuesday 16 September 2014 15.03 EDT
Perhaps the most arresting fact about the Scottish referendum is this: that there is no newspaper – local, regional or national, English or Scottish – that supports independence except the Sunday Herald. The Scots who will vote yes have been almost without representation in the media.
There is nothing unusual about this. Change in any direction, except further over the brink of market fundamentalism and planetary destruction, requires the defiance of almost the entire battery of salaried opinion. What distinguishes the independence campaign is that it has continued to prosper despite this assault.
In the coverage of the referendum we see most of the pathologies of the corporate media. Here, for instance, you will find the unfounded generalisations with which less enlightened souls are characterised. In the Spectator, Simon Heffer maintains that: “addicted to welfare … Scots embraced the something for nothing society”, objecting to the poll tax “because many of them felt that paying taxes ought to be the responsibility of someone else”.
Here is the condescension with which the dominant classes have always treated those they regard as inferior: their serfs, the poor, the Irish, Africans, anyone with whom they disagree. “What spoilt, selfish, childlike fools those Scots are … They simply don’t have a clue how lucky they are,” sneered Melanie Reid in the Times. Here is the chronic inability to distinguish between a cause and a person: the referendum is widely portrayed as a vote about Alex Salmond, who is then monstered beyond recognition (a Telegraph editorial compared him to Robert Mugabe).
The problem with the media is exemplified by Dominic Lawson’s column for the Daily Mail last week. He began with Scotland, comparing the “threat” of independence with that presented by Hitler (the article was helpfully illustrated with a picture of the Führer – unaccompanied, in this case, by the Mail’s former proprietor)…
Read the entire article in The Guardian here.
From Voting on Scottish Independence to Taming Speculation
By Naomi Prins
In a dead heat and with three days to go before the Scottish referendum on independence, most media and economist arguments – beyond those regarding emotional debates of identity, heritage and autonomy – are increasingly fear-driven.
For those advocating Scotland embrace its status quo, the panic-inducing exchange goes like this: if Scotland votes for independence, it will become a debt-saddled wannabe player with no control over its currency or means to raise extra funds during financial crises, the EU will close its doors and NATO will balk at membership unless Scotland continues to house nuclear arms within its borders.
Many mainstream articles, including the recent New York Times op-ed by Nobel laureate, Paul Krugman have poured added more economic panic to the fire. Writing “Be afraid, be very afraid” Krugman promoted a big brother as protector argument. The UK may not make decisions, or allocate tax or resource revenues along the majority of Scottish people’s desires, but when the financial excrement hits the fan, it will save its sidekick. This the UK has done through measures like bailouts and quasi-bank-nationalization (aka Northern Rock), not necessarily on behalf of the population, but for the banks. The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) was a recipient of the UK government’s generosity during the 2008 crisis.
Ironically, having received a 46 billion pound bailout from the UK government, RBS has now threated to move its registered headquarters to the UK for fear of higher taxes, greater regulations, or lack of future bailouts, in the event that Scotland votes for independence. This, to me, is a point in favor of independence. Iceland did well deploying its independent status to divert monies to benefit its citizens rather than foreign banks.
If an independent Scotland does embrace strategies for broad-based economic stability and reduced income inequality, it could become a stronger country. This would be a positive outcome, even considering the limitations of currency-setting control that Krugman mentions. Protection from the most risky capital flows and practices is a cheaper crisis preventative measure in today’s complex, private-bank driven global financial system, than the ability of a central bank to manipulate currency levels anyway.
As far as Krugman is concerned, an independent Scotland would be saddled with similar economic pain to Spain, but without the sunshine. Having just spent several weeks in Spain, and many in Scotland during the 7 years I lived in London, I am an enthusiastic supporter of sunshine and Scottish deerhounds, but it must be said that both countries enjoy stunning landscapes. But first, Scotland isn’t seeking to give up use, or proportionate control, of the pound; it is merely seeking a more autonomous position from which to influence the pound. Plus, its resource revenues dwarf those of Spain, so its footing would be stronger in that regard. Secondly, Spanish banks, kneecapped by bad real estate debt, certainly suffered in recent years. The Spanish economy and public suffered more. But this was mostly due to the flow of foreign speculative capital that had no allegiance to Spain or any country. Unlike Scotland, Spain had fewer reserves to make up for the financial shortfalls that followed these aggressive capital movements.
It seems Krugman’s contends that if Scotland severs politically from the United Kingdom, it will face trouble trying to control its currency and all hell will break loose. But the situation in Spain wasn’t about currency control or lack thereof. Government choices and risky banking policy hurt Spain. After the collapse of its real estate bubble that German banks (along with UK banks) helped to inflate, Germany pressed the ECB to bail out certain big Spanish banks in which Germany had a financial interest. The public was not a consideration. The Euro was an excuse.
A “freer” Scotland would have the opportunity to better monitor rogue capital flows and foreign bank practices in a more stable manner for its population. It could find ways to direct longer-term funds bound to the future of the country, rather than embrace short-term bets bound to nothing.
There’s no economic reason, given current guidelines, for an independent Scotland to be sidelined from the EU, NATO, or the pound, so those fears seem far-fetched. But, perhaps if the September 18th vote supports independence, Scots will feel more empowered about having a say in their country, rather than feel disenchanted due to their economic needs not being met by Westminster’s choices. That could in turn shape the tenor of ongoing compromises. The possibility of such greater individual engagement is an exciting prospect, no matter what road bumps come along the way.
The motion will be defeated . Those in charge also control the voting both . The only hope is that the Scots are determined to make this a fair vote .
Scotland is allowed to vote to secede.
Eastern Ukraine is not.
Makes sense.
the scots will vote for independence
the votes will be tallied otherwise
but independece will come
though not from the ballot box
it will not be nice or easy
The Scots wanted freedom once. The Brits slaughtered them.
Fuck the Brits. Free Scotland!!
[/img]
[img
[img
?v=1406489209[/img]
Ran into a couple of Brits in Chicago this week and asked for a perspective on the Scottish secession issue. Unsurprisingly, they touted their media’s version — that Scotland has little industry and that a majority of the citizens benefit from the civil services of the greater UK. I pointed out that, on the other hand, they could become a new Switzerland — impartial to global governance, potentially favorable tax rates that make it attractive to investors, ability to refuse to send troops off to other people’s war, etc.
They seemed a bit shocked, but had to admit that those were strong points in favor. They even admitted that Scotland has quite a bit of oil industry in the north that would help it be self-sustaining.
It’s a complex issue, to be sure, but I hope that they make it work if they do declare independence.
Don’t they make Dewar’s in Scotland? If so, that’s enough – cut loose.
Brits need Scotland more than Scotland needs Britain. But delusional Brits can’t accept the truth.
[img
[/img]
From the Preface.
Who formed the first modern nation?
Who created the first literate society?
Who invented our modern ideas of democracy and free market capitalism?
The Scots.
Mention of Scotland and the Scots usually conjures up images of kilts, bagpipes, Scotch whisky, and golf. But as historian and author Arthur Herman demonstrates, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries Scotland earned the respect of the rest of the world for its crucial contributions to science, philosophy, literature, education, medicine, commerce, and politics—contributions that have formed and nurtured the modern West ever since.
Arthur Herman has charted a fascinating journey across the centuries of Scottish history. He lucidly summarizes the ideas, discoveries, and achievements that made this small country facing on the North Atlantic an inspiration and driving force in world history. Here is the untold story of how John Knox and the Church of Scotland laid the foundation for our modern idea of democracy; how the Scottish Enlightenment helped to inspire both the American Revolution and the U.S. Constitution; and how thousands of Scottish immigrants left their homes to create the American frontier, the Australian outback, and the British Empire in India and Hong Kong.
How the Scots Invented the Modern World reveals how Scottish genius for creating the basic ideas and institutions of modern life stamped the lives of a series of remarkable historical figures, from James Watt and Adam Smith to Andrew Carnegie and Arthur Conan Doyle, and how Scottish heroes continue to inspire our contemporary culture, from William “Braveheart” Wallace to James Bond.
Victorian historian John Anthony Froude once proclaimed, “No people so few in number have scored so deep a mark in the world’s history as the Scots have done.” And no one who has taken this incredible historical trek, from the Highland glens and the factories and slums of Glasgow to the California Gold Rush and the search for the source of the Nile, will ever view Scotland and the Scots—or the modern West—in the same way again. For this is a story not just about Scotland: it is an exciting account of the origins of the modern world and its consequences.
“The point of this book is that being Scottish turns out to be more than just a matter of nationality or place of origin or clan or even culture. It is also a state of mind, a way of viewing the world and our place in it. . . . This is the story of how the Scots created the basic idea of modernity. It will show how that idea transformed their own culture and society in the eighteenth century, and how they carried it with them wherever they went. Obviously, the Scots did not do everything by themselves: other nations—Germans, French, English, Italians, Russians, and many others—have their place in the making of the modern world. But it is the Scots more than anyone else who have created the lens through which we see the final product. When we gaze out on a contemporary world shaped by technology, capitalism, and modern democracy, and struggle to find our place as individuals in it, we are in effect viewing the world as the Scots did. . . . The story of Scotland in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of hard-earned triumph and heart-rending tragedy, spilled blood and ruined lives, as well as of great achievement.”
Why stay with the UK?
They are broke, they have useless royal clownish drains on the tax structure, they have allowed muslum immigrants to take over, the top five names in the UK are derivations of mohammad, and the UK needs Scotland more than Scotland needs the empire.
Besides, I doubt if a vote in favor will matter much anyway.
I have a cousin that lives in Aberdeenshire, she seems interested in politics so I sent her a message to see what she has to say.
What Would Braveheart Do?
By Patrick J. Buchanan
September 17, 2014
No matter how the vote turns out on Thursday in Scotland, either for independence or continued union with Britain, the disintegration of the Old Continent appears almost inevitable.
Already the British government has conceded that, even if the Scots vote for union, Edinburgh will receive greater powers to rule itself.
Cheering for the breakup of the U.K. are Catalans and Basques, Bretons and Corsicans, Tyroleans, Venetians, Flemish, all dreaming of nations of their own carved out of Spain, France, Italy and Belgium.
Europe’s secessionists have waxed ever stronger since the last decade of the 20th century when the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia splintered into 22 nations and Czechoslovakia broke in two.
Abkhazians and Ossetians then broke from Georgia as Transnistria fought free of Moldova. Chechnya went to war twice to escape from Russia. Secessionists now battle Russia in Ingushetsia and Dagestan.
The decomposition of the nations of Old Europe is the triumph of tribalism over transnationalism. The heart has reasons that the mind knows not, said Pascal. And the wild heart is winning.
The call of blood, history, faith, culture and memory is winning the struggle against Economism, the Western materialist ideology that holds that the desire for money and things is what ultimately motivates mankind.
Economics uber alles. Here is Niall Ferguson in the New York Times wondering how these crazy Scots could think of seceding from England.
“The economic risks are so glaring that even Paul Krugman and I agree it’s a terrible idea. What currency will Scotland use? The pound? The euro? No one knows. What share of North Sea oil revenues will go to Edinburgh? What about Scotland’s share of Britain’s enormous national debt?”
A Scottish vote for independence, Ferguson wails, “would have grave economic consequences, and not just for Scotland. Investment has already stalled. Big companies based in Scotland, notably the pensions giant Standard Life, have warned of relocating to England. Jobs would definitely be lost. The recent steep decline in the pound shows that the financial world hates the whole idea.”
Niall Ferguson is not the kind of fellow who would have been out there at midnight dumping the King’s tea into Boston harbor in 1773.
And he would surely have admonished those stupid farmers on the Concord Bridge that if they didn’t put those muskets down, they could wind up ruining the colonies’ trade with the Mother Country.
“What currency will we use?” Ferguson would have demanded of Jefferson in Independence Hall in 1776.
Yet it is not only in Scotland where peoples are deciding that what separates them is more important than what unites them.
Secessionism is ablaze all over the world.
All those straight lines on Middle East maps drawn up by Sykes and Picot are being erased. The Syria and Iraq we have known will never be the same again, as the Shia-Sunni divide deepens and the Kurds of Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Iran come together.
In this century, we have seen Ethiopia and Sudan break in two, and now South Sudan hosts a tribal-civil war between Dinka and Nuer.
Facing secessionist movements in Tibet and the Uighur lands of the west, Beijing is exporting Han Chinese by the trainload to repopulate the regions. Much like Stalin did with the Baltic republics he annexed in 1940.
Vladimir Putin is perhaps the most popular leader alive for bringing home to Mother Russia the Crimea and making a virtual protectorate of the Russified southeastern Ukraine.
But it is not only secessionism that imperils the One Europe of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman and their historic achievement, the EU. In Britain, France, Holland, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary and most of the countries of Europe, populist parties have arisen to liberate their nations from what they see as the soft dictatorship of the EU.
Foremost among these are Nigel Farage’s Independence Party, the UKIP, and the National Front of Marine Le Pen, who is now running ahead of President Francois Hollande in national polls. This weekend, the Sweden Democrats, a rightist party, doubled its strength, taking 13 percent of the vote as Stockholm’s conservative government fell.
What assures the growth of these parties is what engendered them — mass immigration from the Third World and the attendant rise in crime, Islamism and social disorder.
And what is there to halt the waves of immigration in boats and rafts from across the Mediterranean? Nothing. Out of a Middle East descending into chaos will come millions of Arab and Muslim refugees.
The African continent, which had 1.2 billion people in 2013, will have 2.3 billion in 2050, and 4.2 billion by century’s end.
Hundreds of millions of these African folks will be fleeing these lands to occupy the empty places left by the depopulating nations of Europe, not one of whom has a fertility rate to ensure that its native people survive.
As for the Scots, not to worry if Goldman Sachs is bearish on secession. When you enter the polling booths, just ask yourselves:
What would Braveheart do?
Scotland – The Possible Turning Point
Posted on September 14, 2014 by Martin Armstrong
A number of questions have been coming in about Scotland. Yes, it has the capacity to become the real Switzerland of Europe where capital would be attracted if they are out of the UK and the EU. Why? The EU is looking to more than just tax financial transactions, they are looking to even outlaw short-selling thinking they can support the Euro and their economy that way. Brussels cannot get it through their heads that if you prevent people from selling, you will prevent people from investing.
Scotland would be entitled to the North Sea Oil. It could actually end up with a surplus budget – one of the few around in the world. It would also be interesting but separating from the UK would disrupt the bond markets for the question would then turn to who get the debt. Traditionally, it belongs to the UK and if Scotland leaves the UK it belongs to England.
If Scotland were to recognize that being outside both the UK and EU would act as a magnet for capital if it does not join the paranoid Anglo-Saxons respecting privacy then this could be a real economic boom. They would be clean or past problems with the banks regarding Germany and the USA so you could actually have a real banking system emerge that once existed in Switzerland.
There is no doubt an incredible opportunity for Scotland under independence. Of course, human nature and politicians being what they are, will eventually muck up the whole thing given time. But in the short-term, if Scotland actually took the high road here, they could set the model for the rest of the world.
Scotland could set off a contagion. The vote is due the 18th of September – this week. Many markets have shown the week of 09/15 as a turning point including the metals. This is also coming the week after the turning point of the ECM.
The brits will tout how much scotland gets from them, but in the end if the brits actually thought the union benefitted scotland vastly more than the uk they would be forcing scotland out. If the scots go out on their own and say pissoff to the welfare they get from london they will have trying times but better off in the end.
This has to be scaring TPTB shitless; a precedent must be set no one is allowed to leave…
I have changed my mind. After several weeks in Scotland, and in England, the Scots will suffer horribly if they vote for independence.
The Yes side consists of all the welfare moms and dole bludgers that think they will get more under independence. The no side consists of all the taxpayers.
If they become independent, there will be an exodus of capital and talent from Scotland on a truly grand scale.
Scots overall make northern Europeans look like right wing conservatives. They are the most left wing people imaginable.
How will a country of five million, with no industry, except dwindling oil production, make out in that situation. It will be a catastrophe. But what do I know.
So you were a tourist for a couple weeks …. and that changed your mind. Interesting.
So, you are saying the Scots get a lot of Free Shit from England … so, they shouldn’t leave England, in order to continue getting free shit? Makes no sense to me. You feel the same way about the FSA in the USA!USA!USA!?
To say Scotland has “no industry” is patently ridiculous. You must have only visited castles.
— Energy … Abundant energy resources …. 2,000+ energy-related companies in Scotland including oil, gas, wave, tidal and wind.
— Financial services …. 300-year history in financial services….. one of Europe’s leading financial centres, …. employing 165,00 people either directly or indirectly …. and generating about $11 billion for the economy
— Creative industries …… digital media innovation and creative enterprise. ….. computer gaming, animation, film, TV, music, architecture, design and the arts …. 60,000 jobs …. $7 Billion
— Life sciences ….. one of Europe’s largest life science clusters and is an acclaimed leader in research, development and manufacturing ….. remember Dolly the sheep? ……. the leaders in MRI scanners ………. heavy cancer research, many patents
— Chemical sciences …. a world leader in chemicals … one of Scotland’s biggest exports ….. dozens of international chemical companies have Scottish operation bases
— Other major industries also … booze and textiles, for example
.
.
But what do I know.
The Financial Times states that an independent Scotland will be one of the top 20 wealthiest nations on the planet – wealthier per head than France, the UK and Italy.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5b5ec2ca-8a67-11e3-ba54-00144feab7de.html#slide0
Stuck with a mighty Llpoh smackdown.
I love the taste of Injun Blood in the morning.
I love that movie. One of my top ten all time favorites. Classic.
If the vote is yes:
Renewable energy is gone. bP threatening to stop investments.
Every bank is saying they will leave, as Scotland will not be in the EU, and interest rates for an independent Scotland will be treble that of the UK.
Scientists/educators are saying they will abandon ship. They rely on the EU and the UK.
Don’t know re chemicals and creative.
Re the link that was posted, that is ancient history. No one seems to be saying that now.
The Scots will have no currency, and the leader claims he will default on its portion of UK debt. The result of this would be inability to access capital markets.
Then there is the issue of defense. The Scots have none. Or virtually none.
A large part of Scotland is in energy poverty – many spend thirty, forty fifty percent of incomes on energy. So much for all that energy they have access to.
If I were the UK I would want them out. If I were a Scot I would be clinging to the sugar mama like grim death.
Seriously Stuck, you think I am “just” a tourist? I come to these places to learn things.
Your little wiki search has lead you astray. Scotland is fucked if they abandon ship.
One of the main reasons England wants to keep Scotland is because the nuclear sub ports are there.
But thanks for playing. I love smoked kraut in the morning.
I did mention the Scots will not have a currency, right? And they will not get any assets from the bank of England. And that they will not be part of the EU so cannot access that financial system.
The outflow of business and professionals will be crippling.
The Scots are making a mistake. They should have done it before the oil started to run out.
Scotland’s two dominant political parties are both left wing. Llpoh’s probably right that a lot of the “yes” voters are free shitters who think they don’t currently get enough free shit. Calls to mind Mencken: “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard”. Vote Yes ! That’ll show the fuckers!
reading some of these comments….
i guess sheeple will be sheeple
“Seriously Stuck, you think I am “just” a tourist? I come to these places to learn things.”
—Llpoh, Scholar. Expert on all things Scottish
How many factories did you visit? Universities? Medical facilities? Chemical plants? How many board meetings did you attend? Look … you can’t learn things from visiting castles, pubs, and quaint restaurants. Quit trying to blow kraut flavored smoke up my ass.
You made a SERIOUSLY CRAZY comment about Scotland having “no industry”. Instead of manning-up and saying, “Hey, I was wrong”, … you have decided to keep bluffing and playing the same crappy hand. Good luck, but no one is betting on you.
In fact, you had a pair of Queens and threw them away…. and came up with an even crappier “they have no defense. Neither does Liechtenstein, Austria, Norway or pretty much most European countries who if they spend 2% of GDP on defense, that would be considered extravagant. That’s one reason they are rich …. by not pissing away money on half billion dollar shitty fighter jets.
Hey! I have no dog in this fight. Yes or No, I could care less what the people decide.
But, if I were a Scot … I would vote for independence regardless of real, or imagined, consequences. Better to be poor and free, than being rich and and subservient. Funny thing … I thought Native Americans understood that.
Stuck
Any missing pieces yet on the IKEA furniture? Have you put something on backwards because the picture instructions suck?
They are free. Is Texas free?
I do not profess to be an expert on all thinks British. But compared to Stuck, I suggest I am vastly more experienced and knowledgeable.
I have lived there. I have studied there. I have worked there. I have visited more times than I can remember. I have travelled the isles extensively, individually and with groups. I have visited factories, universities, schools, medical facilities, infrastructure, etc.
Can you say the same, Stuck? Hmmmm?
Scotland is a fine country with fine people. But they have little true industry of their own. Much of their true industry disappeared in the seventies. Much of what they currently have is borrowed – the financial, educational, medical, and even the oil industry are effectively borrowed.
They rely on the symbiosis with the UK and the EU. And that will be lost if they go independent. Those industries have vowed, to a greater or lesser degree, to move to the EU or England, if independence comes to Scotland.
The Scots are heavily left wing/socialist. It will not be a haven for business. They have the oil, but I would worry about their government. The socialist left will never be displaced in Scotland – it is far too heavily entrenched.
It will not be pretty.
I love it when an inexperienced wikireader spouts facts with no ability to ground those facts with experience.
Seriously, Stuck, you are overmatched. But keep being a jackass. It would be like me tryingto teach you about Austria because I can read a wiki article.
I may well be wrong, and the Scots may thrive in independence.
But my comments come from a lot of personal experience as well as research. Yours comes from wikipedia.
Independence sounds great. As I said, if I were English I would hold the door for them. But the Scots themselves are taking a mighty risk. .
“But keep being a jackass.” ——- Llpoh
Here we go again.
You can’t go more than two or three posts with someone who disagrees with you before the name calling starts.
Ok, fine, I’m a kraut and a jackass. And because I never lived in or studied in Scotland, or fucked their sheep, I guess I’m also a dumbass. Fine, I bow down to your extensive knowledge.
Now why don’t you do me a favor and just fuck off, mate.
You started it with the injun crap, asshole.
Don’t really need instruction to put together a simple bookcase. And, quite surprisingly, all the pieces fit and aligned perfectly.
Ikea could save a lot of money by firing every employee on the floor. We had a couple very basic questions (ie, “Where are the bookshelves?”) and we basically got bullshit or blank stares. Most of them just walk around trying to look busy. Not all that friendly either.
But Ms Freud thinks they look really nice.
Due to rearranging the entire room, we now have a long wall, about 15′, with nothing on it. We were delighted to buy the pic below — 55″ x 40″ — looks fantastic (the photo doesn’t do it justice)
[/img]
[img
Grow a fuckin pair of balls dickface. You ARE an Injun … and a while back you said it didn’t bother you as such. Make up your fuckin mind, Injun.
“You started it …” —- Llpoh
Crybaby. Wah!!!!!!!!!
[img
[/img]
Nothing much bothers me. You assumed a lot – that I had no experience but was a general tourist. That was ill -advised and ignorant. I have spent weeks researching and thinking about this and you dismiss me with some wikifacts.
So you I gather you do not like kraut? I did not know that. Seems to me kraut is equivalent to injun, but what do I know. Jackass was in response to your suggestion I did not have experience to go with my opinion .
Ok guy’s im from Scotland and the way I see it is this..The no campaign is unbelievably negative…if you leave the sky will fall etc etc…what a fucking cheek,as if we can’t do anything for ourselves despite the factually correct acheivements we have accomplished,as written by Admin and Stucky and others on this post.We can look after ourselves quite well actually.From what i’m seeing out and about daily and on social media is that the YES campaign is FAR more vocal and organised and positive(if we vote yes..the future will be certain beacause it will be in our hands..etc).The vote is tomorrow and while I see an overwhelming display of YES,i have to confess I worry it will be no because its on a knife edge and, will people bottle it at the last minute.Personally I can’t see the point,because I despise all politicians..it’s like asking turkey’s to vote for the butcher at Christmas.Guys,we are a very,very wealthy country,last report i read was there is a trillion dollars of oil on the west coast that hasn’t even been tapped yet.But before I go I would like to say LLPOH…Your a stupid cunt..come here on holiday and have the place figured out in a week(you should be replacing oreo in the whitehouse with that epic vision and intelligence of yours)..however in your redemption you did say,what do I know.(Wish i knew you were coming over ..could’ve bought you a beer )….(“The Yes side consists of all the welfare moms and dole bludgers that think they will get more under independence. The no side consists of all the taxpayers”.) I will retract the previous sentence if you spent the whole time in Glasgow and/or Dundee)AND FINALLY…Card 802 you said you had a cousin that lives in Aberdeenshire..Ilive there too….So 2 questions..is she fit and if so,what’s her phone number 😉
Glasgow 2 weeks, Edinburgh one.
“I have spent weeks researching and thinking about this and you dismiss me with some wikifacts.” —–Llpoh
You assume also. I did not get the facts from wiki. I got it from a web site in …. Scotland. Right here; —-> http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/can-scotland-afford-be-independent
I will admit I don’t know jack-shit about Scotland. So, yeah, when YOU wrote Scotland has “no industry” … that didn’t sound right, so hell yeah, I had to look it up and found the above webpage (amongst others) …. and not a single one of them backs up your claim.
So, I ask you again; — are you going to stick with your comment?
I am also confused as to your newly acquired revelation. You say you’ve lived there, studied there, etc etc BUT it is only in this recent trip there that caused you to change your mind. Must have been one helluva trip.
Again … because you didn’t respond to it ……. I also don’t understand why you value prosperity over freedom. Is it that hard to break free from the shackles of capitalism?
You can call me Kraut, Nazi, Cockman, or whatever floats your boat … heard it all before and it has lost its sting …. just don’t call me Chief Late For Dinner.
Popcorns getting nuked in the wave…
Question what to drink with it during the oncoming feces flinging and fisticuffs?
BTW
Don’t get me wrong … as to your opinion that Scotland should vote “No” ……. I certainly DO RESPECT that opinion. I am NOT trying to convince you otherwise. It’s a complex subject, and IMHO, both sides make good arguments.
Also, prior to this thread I had NO IDEA you spent so much time in Scotland. I honestly thought this was your first trip there. My bad.
Well, the Scottish folk, watch out, the Neo-Mercantilists from Royal Pain land will do everything they can to wreck the Scots economy.
No industry was literary license.
I think most yes voters are doing it for free shit. But I may be mistaken. They are already free. But they want to be separate. I care not one whit either way. But given they are free shitters, I think they are working against their own interests. If anything, England should toss them, in my opinion.
But their are deeper more malevolent issues going on.
Anonymous
Yes, my cousin is quite fit. Her name is Abigail McGillicutty and she lives in Stonehaven.
Give her a call.
[/img]
[img
“There are” not there.
Freedom is obviously more important than prosperity, but starving folk tend to forget that.
“Not their. ” Grammar is not my strong suit. Fuck me.
card802
Wow, nice gal, your cousin! Ya know … if you zoom to 300%, you can a little bit of both nipples, plus one long pubic hair.
Card 802…no way is she fae stonie..way too fit.and …your way too ugly to be her cousin unless your a genetic freak..oh wait you are
The REAL Reason Britain is Freaking Out About Scottish Independence
Submitted by George Washington on 09/17/2014 13:37 -0400
David Cameron and the British media have been freaking out about the potential Scottish independence.
They’ve blathered on about “history”, “common defense” and other red herrings.
But it’s really all about oil …
Specifically, if Scotland becomes independent, it gets to keep 90% of the revenues from its huge oil reserves.
The New York Times reports:
Scottish nationalists have long argued that being governed from London has deprived their country of its fair share of the wealth from Britain’s oil and natural gas fields, which mostly lie in North Sea waters off their shores.
“It’s Scotland’s oil” was the rallying cry in the 1970s that helped raise the profile of the Scottish Nationalist Party, which now leads the country and is pushing for a vote to secede in the referendum on Thursday. Alex Salmond, the politician leading the separatist movement, has pointed to North Sea energy as the treasure that would help finance an independent Scotland — ensuring that the country could continue the generous public spending, including free university tuition, that he is promising voters.
Al Jazeera notes:
Massive oil reserves in the North Sea are at the heart of the Scottish independence debate. Many are questioning whether the reserves are just for Scotland or if the rest of the United Kingodm should continue to benefit from their profits.
NBC writes:
The ‘Yes’ campaign … says Scots should have total control of their own affairs and that revenue from Scotland’s offshore oil fields would sustain the country’s economy.
In addition, as Max Keiser explained:
(1) The UK can now borrow cheaply using the giant Scottish oil reserves as collateral
(2) If Scotland leaves, the collateral (oil reserves) is no longer available
(3) So the cost of borrowing money for Britain skyrockets
Scotland’s North Sea oil reserves are slowing running out, and so oil won’t be such a valuable resource forever. But for now, it is still invaluable (especially as collateral for British borrowing) … and the key to Britain’s panic over potential Scottish independence.
LLpoh says:
“bP threatening to stop investments.”
BP threatened the Russians up in Sakhalin too.
The Russians cancelled their visas and threw them out of the country.
TODAY is the day that will, one way or another, change Scotland forever.
NINETY SEVEN PERCENT of all eligible voters are registered to vote! Phenomenal.
Vote “Freedom” Scotland!
[/img]
[img
I think the no vote will eek thru. Just my gut feel. Fear of the unknown I think will sway enough that they do not leave. But I could be way off. No one seems to be certain. Even the old hag is worried.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TQy_bfjy9l4
sure, according to the twisted logic of Rethuglican Lincoln cultists
[img
[/img]
loopy, bingo…the nay will prevail…bet on it…rock that womynz vote.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11100248/Scottish-independence-women-voters-could-save-the-Union.html
Scottish independence: women voters could save the Union
The fate of the United Kingdom rests in the hands of women voters, according to an exclusive poll for The Telegraph which shows that the Scottish independence referendum is on a knife edge.
The results show that the No campaign now has a 16 point lead among women who have decided which way to vote – up from 14 points on Sunday. Some 58 per cent of women say they will vote No on Thursday, with 42 per cent planning to vote Yes, among those who have reached a decision.
Men are more evenly split but more than half – 53 per cent – now back independence.