NPR

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:16 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:26 pm

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:21 pm

It is.

Interesting that you chose not to embolden the following 6 words though.

Why is it interesting?

I've never made any attempt to hide my opinion that people who live in Scotland should determine their own future, and I choose that definition carefully because it does not exclude people who were not born within the borders, despite how Scottish nationalism is portrayed by its opponents.

More Scots voted for Brexit than voted for the SNP in the last Parliamentary elections

More voters in Scotland voted against Brexit than for it, and they did so in every council area.

A binary choice will usually deliver a bigger vote than a general election multi-party choice.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:48 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:16 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:26 pm


Why is it interesting?

I've never made any attempt to hide my opinion that people who live in Scotland should determine their own future, and I choose that definition carefully because it does not exclude people who were not born within the borders, despite how Scottish nationalism is portrayed by its opponents.

More Scots voted for Brexit than voted for the SNP in the last Parliamentary elections

More voters in Scotland voted against Brexit than for it, and they did so in every council area.

A binary choice will usually deliver a bigger vote than a general election multi-party choice.

Quite. But it does rather go against the narrative that an SNP majority is Scotland speaking

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:48 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:16 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:26 pm


Why is it interesting?

I've never made any attempt to hide my opinion that people who live in Scotland should determine their own future, and I choose that definition carefully because it does not exclude people who were not born within the borders, despite how Scottish nationalism is portrayed by its opponents.

More Scots voted for Brexit than voted for the SNP in the last Parliamentary elections

More voters in Scotland voted against Brexit than for it, and they did so in every council area.

A binary choice will usually deliver a bigger vote than a general election multi-party choice.

And more voters in the UK, since it was a UK wide vote, voted for it.

westport wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:02 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:48 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:16 am

More Scots voted for Brexit than voted for the SNP in the last Parliamentary elections

More voters in Scotland voted against Brexit than for it, and they did so in every council area.

A binary choice will usually deliver a bigger vote than a general election multi-party choice.

And more voters in the UK, since it was a UK wide vote, voted for it.

Finally!

That’s the point.

westport wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:02 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:48 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:16 am

More Scots voted for Brexit than voted for the SNP in the last Parliamentary elections

More voters in Scotland voted against Brexit than for it, and they did so in every council area.

A binary choice will usually deliver a bigger vote than a general election multi-party choice.

And more voters in the UK, since it was a UK wide vote, voted for it.

And yet you still find people trying to say that social attitudes are broadly the same

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:05 am

westport wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:02 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:48 am


More voters in Scotland voted against Brexit than for it, and they did so in every council area.

A binary choice will usually deliver a bigger vote than a general election multi-party choice.

And more voters in the UK, since it was a UK wide vote, voted for it.

Finally!

That’s the point.

On my ballot paper there was no mention of Scotland, England, Wales or NI.

westport wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:14 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:05 am

westport wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:02 am

And more voters in the UK, since it was a UK wide vote, voted for it.

Finally!

That’s the point.

On my ballot paper there was no mention of Scotland, England, Wales or NI.

If indy is achieved you’ll get a chance to apply to rejoin the EU, the voters in Scotland can choose their own course.
The majority of voters in Scotland want this, or so it would appear from the polls.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:20 am

westport wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:14 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:05 am


Finally!

That’s the point.

On my ballot paper there was no mention of Scotland, England, Wales or NI.

If indy is achieved you’ll get a chance to apply to rejoin the EU, the voters in Scotland can choose their own course.
The majority of voters in Scotland want this, or so it would appear from the polls.

Come up with a viable plan and I will consider it, just like I did the last time.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 12:07 am

Blackmac wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:50 pm . The question was a cheap publicity stunt.

That attitude is why so many assaults against women are not prosecuted.

Away and fuck yourself pal. And you were talking about me making personal comments you fucking scummy prick.

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:09 am

Blackmac wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:50 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:59 pm


It's Friday night, I've had a few, do I go all in on what I think Salmond's objectives and motivations are?

I think he was hurt by not getting the full support of the party and the leadership, and I think this is part of the motivation.

His answers today regarding the original complainants - that is something I will not comment on just now, I'm too angry about it.

His behaviour isn't the subject of the hearing
though and that's not why he was there. The question was a cheap publicity stunt.

As I've said I can't stand Salmond and was disappointed at the outcome of both the civil and criminal cases, however it is impossible not to be concerned at what has gone on here.
As to the complainants, everyone seems concerned about them but at the same time quite happy for Sturgeon and the SG to use them as their moral human shield when all they are doing is using them as an excuse to hide significant portions of evidence.

Ruth Davidson on C4 news last night was fairly emphatic about Salmond: “he’s a terrible misogynist and an awful human being”

Of course he is, but as I said that's not why he was there. He is no longer the one on trial.

Wasn’t arguing, was just quite surprised how emphatic she was on a live interview.

I also agree with your point about everyone using the complainants as a shield then manufacturing outrage when someone else does it. It’s pretty low stuff all round

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 4:21 pm Wasn’t arguing, was just quite surprised how emphatic she was on a live interview.

I also agree with your point about everyone using the complainants as a shield then manufacturing outrage when someone else does it. It’s pretty low stuff all round

Watch yourself Slick, our resident rabid nationalist will start accusing you of encouraging sexual assault.

To be honest this is probably my last contribution to this thread. I can't really be bothered conversing with keyboard cowards who wouldn't dream of making such a scummy comment to my face.

That went well.

Anas Sarwar has been elected as leader of the Labour Party in Scotland. He has his work cut out, but best of luck to him.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-56221768

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:09 am Anas Sarwar has been elected as leader of the Labour Party in Scotland. He has his work cut out, but best of luck to him.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-56221768

Labour have to decide what's more important to them. Fighting independence or fighting the Tories. They've chosen independence for the last ten years and it's fucked them.

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 7:56 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:09 am Anas Sarwar has been elected as leader of the Labour Party in Scotland. He has his work cut out, but best of luck to him.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-56221768

Labour have to decide what's more important to them. Fighting independence or fighting the Tories. They've chosen independence for the last ten years and it's fucked them.

I think Labour are between the proverbial rock and a hard place, and I don't know how they can get out of it. As Neil Findlay says in that piece, if the SNP win a majority in May Labour can't stick with a hard line unionist stance, that alienates half the voters, if they go pro-indy, would that be attractive enough to lure SNP voters? I don't know.

If a second indy vote is lost, no one could reasonably ask for another one for a long time, and I know people will say that was what "they" said last time, but there was a big part of the No campaign telling Scottish voters that the only way they could remain in the EU was to reject independence, that ship has sailed, so there isn't going to be the huge change of circumstances that there was in 2016.

Perhaps Devo-Max is the best platform for Labour, as per the quote from Findlay, it might actually be the best solution for Scotland right now, tbh.

Have to say that it was only really this weekend that the absolute recklessness and madness of calling for another vote hit me.

An already moribund economy being shattered by COVID, huge increase of debt and then a vote to leave our largest trading partner and all the other economic pitfalls that come with it. We need some adults in the room for the next few years.

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:17 am Have to say that it was only really this weekend that the absolute recklessness and madness of calling for another vote hit me.

An already moribund economy being shattered by COVID, huge increase of debt and then a vote to leave our largest trading partner and all the other economic pitfalls that come with it. We need some adults in the room for the next few years.

That could equally be a description of where the UK is right now.

Labour should cut out the confused messaging and simply says they oppose independence and further constitutional agitation for the simple and easily provable reason it would be harmful to the people the party was sent up to represent (and the party was sent up on the basis of solidarity between the working class across the UK).

Its a myth their are legions of working class labour voters who would vote for them over the SNP if they went soft on independence.

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:23 am Labour should cut out the confused messaging and simply says they oppose independence and further constitutional agitation for the simple and easily provable reason it would be harmful to the people the party was sent up to represent (and the party was sent up on the basis of solidarity between the working class across the UK).

Its a myth their are legions of working class labour voters who would vote for them over the SNP if they went soft on independence.

Isn't that what they’ve been doing for the last ten years? How is it different? Because it’s failed big time.

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:17 am Have to say that it was only really this weekend that the absolute recklessness and madness of calling for another vote hit me.

An already moribund economy being shattered by COVID, huge increase of debt and then a vote to leave our largest trading partner and all the other economic pitfalls that come with it. We need some adults in the room for the next few years.

Calling for a vote this year is just a bone thrown to the ground troops - its not happening.

That could equally be a description of where the UK is right now.

Wahabouttery at its weakest and wrong - the UK is (at least) monetary sovereign with a stable currency, a filly functioning central bank and sells out debt auctions in minutes. The SNP plan to try and unofficially use the pound means non of these ways of suddenly injecting billions into an economy thats shut down for health reasons would be available.

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:20 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:17 am Have to say that it was only really this weekend that the absolute recklessness and madness of calling for another vote hit me.

An already moribund economy being shattered by COVID, huge increase of debt and then a vote to leave our largest trading partner and all the other economic pitfalls that come with it. We need some adults in the room for the next few years.

That could equally be a description of where the UK is right now.

Solid Nationalist answer there.

Did you miss the bolded bit?

After some huge leads for 'yes' in polling there has being a tightening recently - this is the first poll that shows No leading (albeit 50/50 excluding DKs)




But I think the most interesting result was this:

“Nicola Sturgeon should resign as First Minister if she is found to have broken the ministerial code”(excluding Don’t Knows)

Yes: 50% (60%)
No: 33% (40%)
Don’t Know: 17% (-)

There was an IPSO/Mori/STV poll from the 21st that had Indy at a four point lead, with dk at 13%.

The status quo is going to be very difficult to shift, Indy doesn't have the same momentum as Brexit, and when push comes to shove I think the vote wouldn't make it over the line.

Not all SNP voters, or people who voted for the SNP, if I can put it that way, not all of them support full independence.

Looks like a no confidence vote on Swinney over the publication of the legal advice.

How on earth did it get to this state.

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:31 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:20 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:17 am Have to say that it was only really this weekend that the absolute recklessness and madness of calling for another vote hit me.

An already moribund economy being shattered by COVID, huge increase of debt and then a vote to leave our largest trading partner and all the other economic pitfalls that come with it. We need some adults in the room for the next few years.

That could equally be a description of where the UK is right now.

Solid Nationalist answer there.

Did you miss the bolded bit?

Solid 'I'll just dismiss this as a nationalist argument do I don't need to think about it' answer there.

No I didn't miss it - would you describe Johnson, Patel, Hancock, Williamson et al as adults in the room?

westport wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 10:49 am Looks like a no confidence vote on Swinney over the publication of the legal advice.

How on earth did it get to this state.

Surely legal professional privilege applies in this case?

should or shouldn't doesn't really come in to it.

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:14 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:31 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:20 am

That could equally be a description of where the UK is right now.

Solid Nationalist answer there.

Did you miss the bolded bit?

Solid 'I'll just dismiss this as a nationalist argument do I don't need to think about it' answer there.

No I didn't miss it - would you describe Johnson, Patel, Hancock, Williamson et al as adults in the room?

If you are seriously making an equivalency between the UK and post independence Scottish economies then lets just move on.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:28 am

westport wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 10:49 am Looks like a no confidence vote on Swinney over the publication of the legal advice.

How on earth did it get to this state.

Surely legal professional privilege applies in this case?

should or shouldn't doesn't really come in to it.

Not being a legal eagle I don't know but, the wee hoose has passed twice that he has to produce it and hasn't.

westport wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:26 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:28 am

westport wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 10:49 am Looks like a no confidence vote on Swinney over the publication of the legal advice.

How on earth did it get to this state.

Surely legal professional privilege applies in this case?

should or shouldn't doesn't really come in to it.

Not being a legal eagle I don't know but, the wee hoose has passed twice that he has to produce it and hasn't.

If this is about the government and parliament not being above the law, then,

THE SCOTTISH POSITION
The traditional Scottish term for the rules and principles governing non-compellable evidence is ‘confidentiality of communications’. While that concept is thought to encompass more than just LPP, privilege has always been its main component (and indeed the term ‘legal professional privilege’ has gained wider use in recent years). The place of LPP in Scots law was explained by Lord Reed, in the Inner House of the Court of Session, in Narden Services Ltd v Inverness Retail and Business Park Ltd & ors [2008]:

‘The notion of LPP… is enshrined in the common law of Scotland. There is (in broad terms) a right of absolute privilege in respect of communications emanating between a solicitor and a client relating to advice and also in respect of any documents… which were prepared in the contemplation of litigation.


Some might say that is very convenient, and I guess it is in this case, but that is the law.

https://www.inhouselawyer.co.uk/legal-b ... litigation.

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:29 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:14 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:31 am

Solid Nationalist answer there.

Did you miss the bolded bit?

Solid 'I'll just dismiss this as a nationalist argument do I don't need to think about it' answer there.

No I didn't miss it - would you describe Johnson, Patel, Hancock, Williamson et al as adults in the room?

If you are seriously making an equivalency between the UK and post independence Scottish economies then lets just move on.

Typical unionist, avoids the question.

See how easy dismissive generalisations are?

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:26 am

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:23 am Labour should cut out the confused messaging and simply says they oppose independence and further constitutional agitation for the simple and easily provable reason it would be harmful to the people the party was sent up to represent (and the party was sent up on the basis of solidarity between the working class across the UK).

Its a myth their are legions of working class labour voters who would vote for them over the SNP if they went soft on independence.

Isn't that what they’ve been doing for the last ten years? How is it different? Because it’s failed big time.

I see the Bain Principle is still in force under Labour's new Scottish Leader

Vote Labour - get Tory

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... d-56238614

Dogbert wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 4:24 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:26 am

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:23 am Labour should cut out the confused messaging and simply says they oppose independence and further constitutional agitation for the simple and easily provable reason it would be harmful to the people the party was sent up to represent (and the party was sent up on the basis of solidarity between the working class across the UK).

Its a myth their are legions of working class labour voters who would vote for them over the SNP if they went soft on independence.

Isn't that what they’ve been doing for the last ten years? How is it different? Because it’s failed big time.

I see the Bain Principle is still in force under Labour's new Scottish Leader

Vote Labour - get Tory

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... d-56238614

This is my point. Labour have gone so far down the anti SNP rabbit hole that they’ve forgotten who their enemy is. Fundamentally, Labour and the SNP are after a lot of the same results for working class people, but it’s the map to get there that they disagree completely on.

Really not true is it - McDonnell and Leonard were being making sympathetic noises about nationalism for the last few years but it got SL nowhere. Labour have little in common wit the SNP who are political chameleons in service of nationalism - like being totally indifferent to EU membership in 2014 to it being vital now.

Anyway see Swinney has being forced to release his legal advice after the Greens stopped being lickspittles for just a moment - lets see how much is redacted.

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 7:29 pm Labour have little in common wit the SNP who are political chameleons in service of nationalism - like being totally indifferent to EU membership in 2014 to it being vital now.

From the 2013 document Scotland’s Future

“We will continue to be a member of the EU and will have a seat at the top table to represent Scotland's interests more effectively; we will not be at risk of leaving the EU against the wishes of the Scottish people”

and

”This independence advantage will be of greatest benefit in our relationship with the EU. This Government sees close engagement with the EU as an opportunity for Scotland, rather than the threat it seems to be for some in the UK. In 40 years of UK and Scottish membership of the EU, Scotland has not had direct representation at Europe's top table, and the price has been paid by important Scottish industries, including our fishing and agriculture sectors. On these issues, Westminster's approach has too often been to the detriment of Scottish jobs and prosperity.

Distrust and disengagement has dominated Westminster's attitude to the EU for too many years. A new threat is now emerging: the growing possibility that, if we remain part of the UK, a referendum on future British membership of the EU could see Scotland taken out of the EU against the wishes of the people of Scotland, with deeply damaging consequences for our citizens and our economy.”

https://www.gov.scot/publications/scotl ... /pages/10/

2014

A strong team of SNP MEPs under Scottish independence is the best way to represent the nation in Brussels, party leader Alex Salmond has said.
Launching his party's European election campaign, the Scottish first minister said Westminster had let Scotland down.
He said a vote for the SNP on 22 May would ensure Scotland's interests were always represented.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-27207661

From the SNP manifesto for the 2005 election

"The SNP supports the European Union. We are in favour of
countries working together to solve problems and create a better
standard of living for everyone.
But we do not get a good deal from the European Union because
Scotland is not an independent member.
As an independent country we would help to make policies and
decisions in the European Union. We could make sure that
Scotland's interests are properly represented."

Biffer - Not sure quoting bombastic statements from the white paper or SNP manifesto's is the clincher you think it is.

There was no legal route to retaining membership - the treaties of the EU specified a country would have to join under article 48. This was stated by the commission at the time:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... membership

And the SG was unable to even get its own lawyers to support its claims:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... e-scotland

The first minister has repeatedly said that Scotland would be an automatic member of the EU, be free to adopt sterling as its currency and would inherit all the UK's opt-outs on EU immigration and border controls. He has asserted that this position was supported by his government's legal advice.

But Salmond was forced to make a statement to the Scottish parliament late on Tuesday after opposition leaders accused him of "lying" and "covering-up" following an admission from his deputy, Nicola Sturgeon, that no specific legal advice had been given by Scottish law officers on EU membership.

Quite simply it was a lie...perhaps saying 'indifference' is too generous. Even the most generous interpretation is there was a substantial risk in 2014.

A final note - I assume you think Salmond is being truthful in your quotes but is obviously lying now?

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:04 pm Biffer - Not sure quoting bombastic statements from the white paper or SNP manifesto's is the clincher you think it is.

There was no legal route to retaining membership - the treaties of the EU specified a country would have to join under article 48. This was stated by the commission at the time:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... membership

And the SG was unable to even get its own lawyers to support its claims:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... e-scotland

The first minister has repeatedly said that Scotland would be an automatic member of the EU, be free to adopt sterling as its currency and would inherit all the UK's opt-outs on EU immigration and border controls. He has asserted that this position was supported by his government's legal advice.

But Salmond was forced to make a statement to the Scottish parliament late on Tuesday after opposition leaders accused him of "lying" and "covering-up" following an admission from his deputy, Nicola Sturgeon, that no specific legal advice had been given by Scottish law officers on EU membership.

Quite simply it was a lie...perhaps saying 'indifference' is too generous. Even the most generous interpretation is there was a substantial risk in 2014.

A final note - I assume you think Salmond is being truthful in your quotes but is obviously lying now?

Not prepared to admit your statement was flat wrong. Quite simply, your statement was a lie.

I assume you think Salmond was lying then but is obviously telling the truth now?

See how easy that is?

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:51 pm

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 9:04 pm Biffer - Not sure quoting bombastic statements from the white paper or SNP manifesto's is the clincher you think it is.

There was no legal route to retaining membership - the treaties of the EU specified a country would have to join under article 48. This was stated by the commission at the time:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... membership

And the SG was unable to even get its own lawyers to support its claims:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... e-scotland

The first minister has repeatedly said that Scotland would be an automatic member of the EU, be free to adopt sterling as its currency and would inherit all the UK's opt-outs on EU immigration and border controls. He has asserted that this position was supported by his government's legal advice.

But Salmond was forced to make a statement to the Scottish parliament late on Tuesday after opposition leaders accused him of "lying" and "covering-up" following an admission from his deputy, Nicola Sturgeon, that no specific legal advice had been given by Scottish law officers on EU membership.

Quite simply it was a lie...perhaps saying 'indifference' is too generous. Even the most generous interpretation is there was a substantial risk in 2014.

A final note - I assume you think Salmond is being truthful in your quotes but is obviously lying now?

Not prepared to admit your statement was flat wrong. Quite simply, your statement was a lie.

I assume you think Salmond was lying then but is obviously telling the truth now?

See how easy that is?

Come one now, I read on some other thread that you're in your 50's. . .

That response (and the ones further up) aren't even befitting of primary 7 debating club: just address tc's points.