Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 8

[powerstroke]

marshal_alan said:

yes and there is a heck of a lot of socialists that joined the SNP to get independence and nothing else, the greens probably tick more of the boxes in terms of environmental issues and being a true socialist party. The old problem of locking half a dozen socialists in a room and within 10 minutes you would have 5 political parties and 10 splinter groups is sadly true. The SNP does keep a tight reign on its members but a lot are getting severely fed up with that

when it comes to fracking especially there is a lot of us scots that are prepared to risk our lives to stop it, the only way they will frack scotland is if they take us dead. far too many activists rolled over in england, the frackers wont get it as easy here

Have you ever been called a luddite ???

[Sway]

andymadmak said:

marshal_alan said:

when it comes to fracking especially there is a lot of us scots that are prepared to risk our lives to stop it, the only way they will frack scotland is if they take us dead.

have you heard yourself?

I'm wondering if he realises how much fracking is already, and has been done, around Scotland...

[davepoth]

Sway said:

andymadmak said:

marshal_alan said:

when it comes to fracking especially there is a lot of us scots that are prepared to risk our lives to stop it, the only way they will frack scotland is if they take us dead.

have you heard yourself?

I'm wondering if he realises how much fracking is already, and has been done, around Scotland...

"You may take our lives, but you'll never take our...SHALE OIL"

Something like that, anyway.

[technodup]

s2art said:

Why? What is so bad about fracking?

He saw a Youtube video with a tap on fire so he jumped on the passing bandwagon.

[Patrick Bateman]

marshal_alan said:

when it comes to fracking especially there is a lot of us scots that are prepared to risk our lives to stop it, the only way they will frack scotland is if they take us dead. far too many activists rolled over in england, the frackers wont get it as easy here

[r11co]

Strocky said:

r11co said:

The MSP who vocally expressed her annoyance at the eventual suspension was Rosanna Cunningham.

For clarity and openness, Mike Rumbles was probably the most vociferous, based on the solid argument that we shouldn't be giving in to terrorists

Mike Rumbles may have made a statement to the media to that effect after the fact, but he wasn't the one standing in the chamber jabbing his finger and howling like a deranged banshee at the presiding officer's podium after everyone else (Sturgeon and Swinney included) had already got up to leave.

Edited by r11co on Friday 24th March 06:48

[Pooh]

Sway said:

andymadmak said:

marshal_alan said:

when it comes to fracking especially there is a lot of us scots that are prepared to risk our lives to stop it, the only way they will frack scotland is if they take us dead.

have you heard yourself?

I'm wondering if he realises how much fracking is already, and has been done, around Scotland...

Amazingly enough, I didn't have to climb over any dead bodies any of the times I was involved in fracking in and around Scotland.

[SilverSixer]

57 Chevy said:

technodup said:

SilverSixer said:

Scotland clearly wants to remain in the EU, by a majority vote,

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Just because stumpy Sturgeon says it does not make it true.

Scotland has not been asked the question, so how can it have given its answer?

Also, I voted remain but would much rather stay part of the UK than leave rUK to be part of Europe.

Whether we like it or not, perhaps this is in fact the reason why Scotland needs to be asked the question again - once the outcome of the brexit negotiations is clear (r11co seems to think they want the referendum now, before brexit outcomes are known, but that is not the case, so I'm not going to reply to his lengthy post on the subject which makes this basic error). The EU Referendum has introduced a very important complexity which clouds the clarity of the 2014 referendum result. It's going to have to be done, for the sake of stability and finality. One way or another, it will probably kill the SNP stone dead. Which is what needs to happen, frankly.

What is there to fear? Opinion on here seems convinced that Scotland doesn't want independence, and I'm inclined to agree. So what's the harm in asking. Add a no-more-referendums-for-30-years clause to the bill granting it, insist on a super majority (like we should have done with brexit) and let the dice fall how they may. Good luck, SNP, you'll need it.

[r11co]

SilverSixer said:

r11co seems to think they want the referendum now, before brexit outcomes are known, but that is not the case, so I'm not going to reply to his lengthy post on the subject which makes this basic error.

You need to re-read what I said. I (and everyone else) know that the SNP want to have another independence referendum before the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt. An important difference.

I also clearly stated my reasons why they want this. Sturgeon wants to paint a picture of Brexit doom and gloom so that her alternative of being out of every union appears a better option, before the Scots have had a chance to experience just being out of one union and realising it isn't as bad as it seems.

If Sturgeon really believed Brexit was going to be the disaster she says it will be then she would have everything to gain and nothing to lose by delaying as Scots would be clamouring for independence and a path back to the EU. Nothing to lose that is apart from her simple majority in Holyrood if the timetable goes beyond 2020, and there's still that awkward issue of having to keep the Greens onside for longer......

[SilverSixer]

r11co said:

You need to re-read what I said. I (and everyone else) know that the SNP want to have another independence referendum before the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt. An important difference.

Why doesn't this apply to the rest of the UK then? Why aren't we having a second referendum on EU membership once the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt? You can't make the one argument without making the other. You sound like Theresa May. ;-)

[skahigh]

SilverSixer said:

Why doesn't this apply to the rest of the UK then? Why aren't we having a second referendum on EU membership once the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt? You can't make the one argument without making the other. You sound like Theresa May. ;-)

Of course you can. It's a completely different question.

[SilverSixer]

skahigh said:

SilverSixer said:

Why doesn't this apply to the rest of the UK then? Why aren't we having a second referendum on EU membership once the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt? You can't make the one argument without making the other. You sound like Theresa May. ;-)

Of course you can. It's a completely different question.

Only if it suits your argument to think so. The SNP have a point. I don't want them to win, but they have a point. Just trying to deny it is only going to make then more determined.

Work with them, expose the flimsiness of their case (again), and get it over with.

[skahigh]

SilverSixer said:

Only if it suits your argument to think so. The SNP have a point. I don't want them to win, but they have a point. Just trying to deny it is only going to make then more determined.

Work with them, expose the flimsiness of their case (again), and get it over with.

No, it doesn't suit my argument, I have no dog in this fight and I'm torn on the idea of a second referendum after the A50 negotiations.

But, quite clearly and contrary to your assertion, it is possible to make a case against a referendum on Scottish independence before the outcome of the A50 negotiations is known whilst simultaneously not supporting a second EU referendum.

The EU choice and the Scottish independence choice are two completely different questions with different factors affecting their outcomes.

[r11co]

SilverSixer said:

Why doesn't this apply to the rest of the UK then? Why aren't we having a second referendum on EU membership once the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt? You can't make the one argument without making the other.

If a party wanted to stand on a manifesto pledge to offer such a referendum (such a party already exists!) and then won a majority in parliament in the next UK General Election then there is nothing stopping the rest of the UK having another vote.

You're not seeing the bigger picture at all!

Edited by r11co on Friday 24th March 10:40

[blinkythefish]

SilverSixer said:

r11co said:

You need to re-read what I said. I (and everyone else) know that the SNP want to have another independence referendum before the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt. An important difference.

Why doesn't this apply to the rest of the UK then? Why aren't we having a second referendum on EU membership once the consequences of the Brexit negotiations are felt? You can't make the one argument without making the other. You sound like Theresa May. ;-)

Once the consequences of the A50 negotiations are felt, we will have already left the EU. Have all the referendums you want on whether to leave the EU at that point, the deed will have been done.

What the SNP are trying to achieve is to host the indyref while nothing is known about the state of the UK/rUK/Scotland post EU negotiations, so they can paint a picture of doom and gloom in the rUK out of the EU(if its so bad their indyref would be a certainty if hosted after A50 is complete, so why don't they want that?) and a wonderful future in the iScot in EU(even though that isn't an readily available option).

You seem to be falling for their line that yes in the indyref == remain in the brexit ref and that somehow the indyref would be a final approval of the A50 negotiations. It isn't, its a very different question.

[confused_buyer]

SilverSixer said:

Whether we like it or not, perhaps this is in fact the reason why Scotland needs to be asked the question again - once the outcome of the brexit negotiations is clear (r11co seems to think they want the referendum now, before brexit outcomes are known, but that is not the case, so I'm not going to reply to his lengthy post on the subject which makes this basic error).

We have no idea when the Brexit outcomes will be known. It might be 2019 but it is entirely possible it could be several years after that. The Government may be aiming for end of 2018 but it isn't entirely withing their control or gift to ensure that is the case. We may well be in a temporary transitional arrangements for 5 years before any final trade deal is agreed.

[A.J.M]

Over 212,000 signatures on the petition.

Also, fracking? That will happen, if it's not already being done.

[gofasterrosssco]

confused_buyer said:

SilverSixer said:

Whether we like it or not, perhaps this is in fact the reason why Scotland needs to be asked the question again - once the outcome of the brexit negotiations is clear (r11co seems to think they want the referendum now, before brexit outcomes are known, but that is not the case, so I'm not going to reply to his lengthy post on the subject which makes this basic error).

We have no idea when the Brexit outcomes will be known. It might be 2019 but it is entirely possible it could be several years after that. The Government may be aiming for end of 2018 but it isn't entirely withing their control or gift to ensure that is the case. We may well be in a temporary transitional arrangements for 5 years before any final trade deal is agreed.

I agree, we may not know the 'final' arrangement by the end of 2018 or much later. The YESNP seem to think people will be able to make an informed decision within just weeks of the "deal" being made public, conveniently side-stepping the fact that would mean the vast majority of the campaign would be have a principle piece of information not known. This would only really serve to benefit the nats argument, as they try to play off the 'unknowns' of any Brexit deal against the multitude of uncertainties (let be honest, they would fail at the real questions handing over indy, again) put to them..

[r11co]

A.J.M said:

Over 212,000 signatures on the petition.

Also, fracking? That will happen, if it's not already being done.

Former SNP Minister Kenny MacAskill said:

Retaining broad-based support engenders fear of necessary radical steps. For example, how many discussions or debates does it take to make your mind up on fracking?

Kenny MacAskill warns Sturgeon not to take voters for granted.

The bottom line is the SNP are paralysed in government as any move in any direction stands to lose them a proportion of their support, with those who voted SNP because they believed they stood for social justice/environmental issues but didn't want independence already on the shoogly peg if not gone already. Another highly publicised delay in implementing welfare powers or the fracking moratorium being lifted (which I am willing to bet is a dead-cert once the s.30 vote is passed and the Scottish Greens have outlasted their usefulness) will have them lost for good. Yet another reason to prematurely kick off another round of independence debating to avoid anyone talking about other issues of governance - probably the SNP's biggest squirrel so far.

I said in the last iteration of this thread that the best response Nationalists seem to have to these arguments these days is 'whitabootery' and 'whatiffery', pointing at faults in Conservatives and Labour. Strocky's attempted it a couple of times in this thread, but the two-wrongs-make-a-right argument (while flawed) is irrelevant. This is about the gameplay of the SNP and they are the only ones who have showed their hand before the game even started (next Wednesday, I do believe.....)

Edited by r11co on Friday 24th March 14:08

[kowalski655]

gofasterrosssco said:

I agree, we may not know the 'final' arrangement by the end of 2018 or much later. The YESNP seem to think people will be able to make an informed decision within just weeks of the "deal" being made public, conveniently side-stepping the fact that would mean the vast majority of the campaign would be have a principle piece of information not known. ...

SNP want the vote ASAP as they will ,if they lose, be able then to say "give us IndyRef3 as now knowing the exact terms of Brexit is a material change of circumstances"
After Brexit they will say they are being dragged down if it doesnt go well,and if it does go well then they will say an iScot would be even better in the EU

I have no idea what they will use as an excuse for Indyref4! probably that it's gotten a bit colder that week