You can't quit UK without my approval, David Cameron warns Scots

LordSutch

The BBC 4 programme was very good last night, the general consensus being that if Scotland went for a total break from the Union then it would be very messy indeed, with all sorts of legal issues to be sorted over several decades!! My impression from the discussion was that Salmond will lean towards "Devolution Max" while Westminster & Holyrood (minus the SNP of course) will push for a straight forward question on the ballot paper: Do you want Scotland to stay in the UK? Do you want Scotland to leave the UK?

Personally I prefere the latter question IN or OUT, no messing about

Sunnyisland

Betsy wrote: »

Queen Elizabeth II may be Jamaica's Head of State but the British monarchy does not rule Jamaica. The Jamaican Monarchy does. That's why, to the Jamaicans, Queen Elizabeth II is the Queen of Jamaica, not the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, Queen of Jamaica and of Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth. The Jamaican Monarchy is completely separate and independent of the British Monarchy and represented by it own unique symbols but just happens to have the same woman heading it. On all matters of the Jamaican state, the monarch is advised solely by Jamaican Ministers of the Crown and, effective with the Jamaica Independence Act, 1962, no British or other realm government can advise the monarch on matters pertinent to Jamaica. All of this is also true of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Bermuda, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and the other realms of which Elizabeth II is Head of State. They are all ruled by their own monarchies, not the British one.

I'll repeat: Jamaica becoming a republic has nothing to do with Britain. Jamaica will be ditching the Jamaican Monarchy, not the British Monarchy. It has nothing to do with us.

Well Batsy you would want to let the jamicans know as some of them are getting into a rather royal lizzy fit over the calls from there prime minister simpson miller saying Jamaica is to breck relations with the queen and declare its self a republic.read more here vvvv
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=jamica%20%26%20the%20queen%20of%20england&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CD8QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjamaica-gleaner.com%2Fgleaner%2F20120111%2Fnews%2Fnews3.html&ei=EUUPT7G9IMeKhQeI4bCuAg&usg=AFQjCNGqfi41ufqOBGs-CoZ4-fXeuq4aUA

bwatson

djrichard wrote: »

I bet you could have a search and find similar examples of these actions taken in every country. When I lived in Spain for 4 years, I used to get stopped by the police driving either my car, my motorbike or whilst working. They had a terrible attitude towards me, when they were taking down my details they would write in the nationality section "Ingles" at which point I would ALWAYS make sure they understood me when I said "NO! NO! NO! No Ingles, Escocés" at which point they would ALL (Im talking about nearly 300 hundred police officers) suddenly look differently at me and say "you are Scottish?" and Id say "si si si!". They were then much nicer, sometimes not even giving me a ticket. They would say they would love to visit Scotland and that the people were much nicer than the English who they found to be very arrogant. More often than not many would exclaim witrh a big grin "aaaah William Wallace" at which point I would shout "Freeeeeedom". Ah the things you do to get out of trouble! hahaha

Interesting that you see it fit to laugh off such obvious institutionalized racism.

bwatson

realies wrote: »

Well Batsy you would want to let the jamicans know as some of them are getting into a rather royal lizzy fit over the calls from there prime minister simpson miller saying Jamaica is to breck relations with the queen and declare its self a republic.read more here vvvv
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=jamica%20%26%20the%20queen%20of%20england&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CD8QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjamaica-gleaner.com%2Fgleaner%2F20120111%2Fnews%2Fnews3.html&ei=EUUPT7G9IMeKhQeI4bCuAg&usg=AFQjCNGqfi41ufqOBGs-CoZ4-fXeuq4aUA

Were you intending to refute his point?

It is an issue for Jamaicans and the constitutional monarchy in Jamaica, not an issue for the British and the constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom. A Jamaican newspaper calling Elizabeth II the "Queen of England" doesn't prove any point you may have been trying to put forward.

Judgement Day

realies wrote: »

Well Batsy you would want to let the jamicans know as some of them are getting into a rather royal lizzy fit over the calls from there prime minister simpson miller saying Jamaica is to breck relations with the queen and declare its self a republic.read more here vvvv
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=jamica%20%26%20the%20queen%20of%20england&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CD8QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjamaica-gleaner.com%2Fgleaner%2F20120111%2Fnews%2Fnews3.html&ei=EUUPT7G9IMeKhQeI4bCuAg&usg=AFQjCNGqfi41ufqOBGs-CoZ4-fXeuq4aUA

Interesting link - especially since you posted it - as it seems to indicate, especially by the responses, that there's a fair amount of support for maintaining the link with Britain. The Jamaican PM sounds like another Salmond type opportunist - hopefully an independent Scotland would make a better fist of it than Jamaica - but I doubt it.

Fratton Fred

Jamaica has gone from being part of a common travel area with the UK, to residents requiring visas to enter the UK in a relatively short space of time.

I'm not sure if they are too happy about that.

woodoo

This two and a half year debate on Scotland possibly leaving the UK is going to cause lasting damage between Scotland and England. Its going to focus alot of minds on issues that they would otherwise not have know much about. Average English people realising that alot of Scots don't like them and vise versa.

When the pros and cons are laid out we may be surprised which side may end up wanting to go it alone. Interesting times.

Sunnyisland

b watson wrote: »

Were you intending to refute his point?

It is an issue for Jamaicans and the constitutional monarchy in Jamaica, not an issue for the British and the constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom. A Jamaican newspaper calling Elizabeth II the "Queen of England" doesn't prove any point you may have been trying to put forward.

If you read my previous posts I pointed out that the new prime minister has stated that she has pledged to ditch the Queen as head of state and make the island a republic She also said she will replace the Privy Council in London with the Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice as Jamaica's highest court of appeal. She said this will "end judicial surveillance from London". According to Batsy :Jamaica becoming a republic would therefore be nothing to do with Britain: If the queen has nothing to do with jamaica why is the new prime minister breaking these links ?

Judgement Day wrote: »

Interesting link - especially since you posted it - as it seems to indicate, especially by the responses, that there's a fair amount of support for maintaining the link with Britain. The Jamaican PM sounds like another Salmond type opportunist - hopefully an independent Scotland would make a better fist of it than Jamaica - but I doubt it.

Of course I know I posted the links ? What are you implying ? I never said I supported it or otherwise,
First Minister Alex Salmond an opportunist ? According to a ComRes poll in October, 39 per cent of those surveyed in the UK agreed Scotland should have independence. In Scotland, the figure was almost half at 49 per cent. How is that being opportunist ?




Here is another note from the caribbean.

The move reflects an accelerating drift towards republicanism among Commonwealth Caribbean countries. Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago have both dropped the Queen as head of state, while opting to remain in the Commonwealth. As I said earlier bad start to the year for the queen.

Sunnyisland

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100129350/in-today%E2%80%99s-world-a-united-britain-is-more-of-a-necessity-than-ever/

Peter osborne From the telegraph,You can read full article in link.

Alex Salmond, that most brilliant and attractive of modern British politicians, is capable of superbly articulating the sense of nobility, romance, mission and fierce patriotism felt by many SNP supporters. Nationalism and the cry for liberty can be an intoxicating cocktail, even at the start of the 21st century. So far his opponents have produced nothing to rival it.
They have played the politics of fear, warning Scots of the economic uncertainties that lurk outside the Union. It is not a very convincing message, and it is also an unworthy one. The United Kingdom richly deserves to survive – but only if it can conjure up its own poetry and romance, and embrace the English, Scots, Welsh and Irish on equal terms.
On their own, our composite parts have always been rather unimpressive and unattractive. Together, we have been amazing. Four hundred years ago, before the Act of Union, the nations that today make up Britain were piffling little places on the edge of the world, prone to regicides, civil disturbance, internecine strife and murder.
The fusion of those nations created something quite extraordinary. Here are some of Great Britain’s achievements following the Act of Union: we abolished slavery, founded an empire, produced some of the greatest literature the world has known, stood together alone against Nazi Germany in 1940, our finest hour. Of course, we have committed some terrible crimes, and they must be taken into account – but we do take them into account, normally with far more vigorous self-examination than is shown by other nations.
In doing all this we have produced something called Britishness. Nobody can exactly say what it means, but all the world knows what it is: tolerance, a sense of fairness and justice, humour, proportion, decency and good manners. I feel certain that Britain’s contribution – its solid, thoughtful, civilising presence at the top tables, the example that is set by the country’s very existence – is more necessary than ever in a formless world dominated by the rise of China and the slow, tormented decline of the United States.

I thought some of you might enjoy that

Judgement Day

Guyana has been independent since 1966 and a Republic since 1970, while Trinidad & Tobago was granted independence in 1962 and became a Republic in 1976. I don't see what point you're trying to make apart from proving your anti-British credentials.

Nearby Belize (independent since 1981) seems quite happy to have Queen Elizabeth II as head of state. Here's a sample of their currency which will probably have you choking on your cornflakes.

Night, night.

Dyr

Judgement Day wrote: »

Guyana has been independent since 1966 and a Republic since 1970, while Trinidad & Tobago was granted independence in 1962 and became a Republic in 1976. I don't see what point you're trying to make apart from proving your anti-British credentials.

Nearby Belize (independent since 1981) seems quite happy to have Queen Elizabeth II as head of state. Here's a sample of their currency which will probably have you choking on your cornflakes.

Night, night.

they'd wanna get a new portrait artist, last time I checked, stephenie beacham wasn't queen of england

Sunnyisland

Judgement Day wrote: »

Guyana has been independent since 1966 and a Republic since 1970, while Trinidad & Tobago was granted independence in 1962 and became a Republic in 1976. I don't see what point you're trying to make apart from proving your anti-British credentials.

Nearby Belize (independent since 1981) seems quite happy to have Queen Elizabeth II as head of state. Here's a sample of their currency which will probably have you choking on your cornflakes.

Night, night.

I accept any legal tender thank you, night

Echoes675

LordSutch wrote: »

What I mean is, the break-up of the United Kingdom is far too big for the likes of a a single politiician to determine

But this isn't the case as it would take a majority vote from 1 of the 4 member countries of the UK to decide their own fate. As I see it not just one man.

woodoo

realies wrote: »

In doing all this we have produced something called Britishness. Nobody can exactly say what it means, but all the world knows what it is: tolerance, a sense of fairness and justice, humour, proportion, decency and good manners. I feel certain that Britain’s contribution – its solid, thoughtful, civilising presence at the top tables, the example that is set by the country’s very existence

I laughed at that (bold). I just don't recognise that in the citizens in the north of this Island that like to call themselves British. Thinking of the Orange Order, of the way the Irish have been treated up there, of the attitudes towards Irish culture, Catholicism, of how foreigners from other countries/colours/creeds are treated etc.

Back to Scotland though. I'm not sure how much a posh Tory Prime minister like Cameron will help the cause of maintaining the union. Alot of Scottish people will not like him.

LordSutch

eoin_mcg wrote: »

But this isn't the case as it would take a majority vote from 1 of the 4 member countries of the UK to decide their own fate. As I see it not just one man.

What I actually said in post#283 was "What I mean is, the break-up of the United Kingdom is far too big for the likes of a a single politician to determine, specially the likes of Alex Salmond, who is hell bent on taking Scotland out of the Union at any cost (and only on his terms)"
That's what I actually said, and it was in this context, that he (and not the Scottish people) would demand when the referendum will be held! The latter half of the term was not mentioned in the SNP manifesto, and it was only in the last three days before polling that Salmond inserted the "We will have a referendum in the last part of the term" < sneaky bugger that he is )

Scotland will decide, not Salmond.

Cardinal Richelieu

If it did happen, wouldn't Labour suffer at WestMinister losing its Scottish voting heartland? 40 less MPs at least.

who the fug

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

If it did happen, wouldn't Labour suffer at WestMinister losing its Scottish voting heartland? 40 less MPs at least.

Be quiet you, let the turkeys vote themselves out of exsistence

A Dub in Glasgo

That is why Labour are a Unionist party

Batsy

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

If it did happen, wouldn't Labour suffer at WestMinister losing its Scottish voting heartland? 40 less MPs at least.

That's why I'm surprised at Cameron wanting to keep the Union and why it doesn't surprise that Miliband wants to.

Scottish independence would be good for the Tories in England and bad for Labour. That's because Labour often have to rely on Scottish votes to get into power as they often get less votes and less seats than the Tories in England in General Elections. Labour only won the 2005 General Election due to the votes it got in Scotland because it finished behind the Tories in England. If Scotland had gained independence before 2005 the UK (England, Wales, NI) would have elected a Tory government in 2005. If Scotland leaves the Union the Tories will win more General Elections.

A new poll has also shown that the English are more in favour of Scottish indepence than the Scots are and that more people in England are in favour of Scottish indepence than against it, whereas the opposite is true in Scotland. According to a poll in The Sunday Telegraph, 43% of English voters are in favour of Scotland leaving the union, with 32% against. In Scotland, 40% backed independence, with 43% against.

http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16149343

Official: More English than Scots want independence for Scotland

There is more support in England for Scotland leaving the United Kingdom than there is north of the border, according to a poll for The Mail on Sunday.

Scots do not want the English to meddle in whether they end their 300-year union with England, but English voters are much keener to have a say in the matter.

And the main worry of Scots appears to be that cutting their ties with England and Wales will leave them with less cash.

It is the first comprehensive opinion poll in Scotland and England since Prime Minister David Cameron decided to throw down the gauntlet to Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond, as revealed by The Mail on Sunday last week.

Two surveys, conducted separately in England and Scotland by polling firm Survation, show that Mr Salmond’s plan to offer an alternative of ‘devo max’ – grabbing more power from Westminster for Scotland, but staying in the UK – could backfire.

When asked David Cameron’s preferred straight ‘Yes or No’ question on whether Scotland should be independent, a total of 26 per cent of Scots favour breaking away, with 46 in favour of staying in the UK. However, when the same question is put alongside the ‘devo max’ option as an alternative, there is a different result.



In that case support for independence falls to 23 among Scots, with backing for staying put in the UK rising to 52. It suggests that the ‘devo max’ alternative threatens Mr Salmond’s dream of becoming the first leader of a new independent Scotland.

When independence for Scots is put to English voters in a straight ‘Yes or No’ question, 40 per cent say ‘No’ with 29 per cent saying ‘Yes’ – three points higher than the result in Scotland.

The gulf in opinion north and south of the border is most stark over the question of whether the referendum should be UK-wide. Nearly seven out of ten Scots say the English should mind their own business. But 38 per cent of people in England want a vote in the referendum, with the same number against.

The poll also suggests the English are less worried about Scotland abandoning links with England than are the Scots.

When voters in Scotland are asked what should happen if there is a small majority for ‘independence’ but even greater backing for ‘devo max,’ more than half say Scotland should not break away. When the same question is put to English voters, they are content to say goodbye to Scotland.

More than four in ten Scots fear independence will leave them worse off financially. Fewer than one in four say they will gain. The collapse of the euro has done little to swell enthusiasm for Mr Salmond’s nationalist cause. A massive 79 per cent of Scots do not want to join the euro; 49 per cent don’t even want to join the EU, with only 32 in favour, if they leave the UK.

An early poll in 2013 – rather that 2014, the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn, as planned by Salmond – is endorsed by a small margin in Scotland, and overwhelmingly in England and Wales.

Survation interviewed 1,001 people in Scotland and 1,019 in England and Wales between Thursday and Saturday.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086833/Official-More-English-Scots-want-independence-Scotland.html#ixzz1jXsCu5te

Thinkingaboutit

Scottish oil is a bit more valuable than cranky Nordie pols. I'd say David Cameron would let the six counties go regardless of the result.

Batsy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Then you have the numerous assaults on English people in Scotland, with the tragic murder of a 19 year old in Edinburgh a few years ago because he sounded English.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/06/huguclapshaw210606_228x333.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-391763/Boy-7-attacked-Scotland-wearing-England-shirt.html#ixzz1jXqVMTIG

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1114567/Scars-girl-beaten-English-Scotland.html#ixzz1jXqjVgSP

irishh_bob

Batsy wrote: »

A seven-year-old football fan punched in the head by a racist thug because he was wearing an England top vowed today to continue to support his soccer heroes.

Hugo Clapshaw was enjoying a kick-around with his father in Edinburgh at the weekend when a man shouted abuse and lashed out with his fists.

Lothian and Borders Police today branded the attack "cowardly and pathetic" and Scottish politicians joined in the condemnation.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-391763/Boy-7-attacked-Scotland-wearing-England-shirt.html#ixzz1jXqVMTIG




This young woman was viciously assaulted in Scotland because she has an English accent.

Lucy Newman, 22, was left with two black eyes and a broken cheekbone after a night out with friends in Aberdeen.

The beauty therapist, who is 5ft 3in tall, said: 'Two guys walked past and shouted something about the English.

'I didn't think it was aimed at me until one of them whacked me right in the face. The next thing I was lying on the ground with blood pouring from my head.'

Miss Newman moved to Scotland with her family when she was four and, 18 years on, has almost lost her English accent.

But she says it still comes through on certain words, leading to endless taunts.

'The English thing doesn't bother me, I'm used to it,' she added. 'But no one has ever gone this far before. Why would they? The guy was obviously a coward.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1114567/Scars-girl-beaten-English-Scotland.html#ixzz1jXqjVgSP

no one can hate like a scot , most of them dislike the english with a passion but love being british

give me an open minded english man or woman anyday over a bitter , begrudging mean spirited scot

FTA69

give me an open minded english man or woman anyday over a bitter , begrudging mean spirited scot

Open minded people like those who knifed Stephen Lawrence to death because he happened to be black? It may come as a surprise but English people (as well as every other people) are more than capable of racism; yours is a foolish line of argument to go down.

djrichard

irishh_bob wrote: »

no one can hate like a scot , most of them dislike the english with a passion but love being british

give me an open minded english man or woman anyday over a bitter , begrudging mean spirited scot

You could pick out incidents of the exact same thing happening anywhere. Stop trying to grab attention with your images. Ive heard a huge amount of anti-English sentiment here in Ireland and you have control over your own country. Just imagine how much worse it would be if you didnt have control!

Where are you getting your facts from that state the Scots hate the English but "love" being British? I think youre talking about something you know feck all about. The only people Ive seen waving the Union Jack are my fellow Rangers fans and whenever there is a royal function. The absolute vast majority, in fact Id go as to say virtually everyone I know personally, does not like the fact we are part of Britain, we would much rather have our own Scottish passports. We dont hate the monarchy, but have no real interest, but they are considered to be irrelevant to our actual lives. We dont hate the English, we just dont like the arrogance and constantly being belittled as some sheep shagging inbreds from away up north.

We would have an "open-minded" person of ANY nationality over a violent thug from anywhere. You point is hardly comparable. Grow up.

Border-Rat

Posting isolated incidents from 6 years ago. Way to keep the topic highbrow and relevant, lads. This thread is headed down the David Cochrane route.

dinorebel

LordSutch wrote: »

Any takers yet?

Personally I'm thinking Gordon Brown will emerge as the Pro-Union voice, but it remains to be seen . . .

It is likely to be Alastair Darling who would be acceptable to both Labour and Conservatives.

Jorah

FTA69 wrote: »

Open minded people like those who knifed Stephen Lawrence to death because he happened to be black? It may come as a surprise but English people (as well as every other people) are more than capable of racism; yours is a foolish line of argument to go down.

That was almost 19 years ago. It was tragic, but it's almost two decades old.

And as controversial as it may sound, a black teenager is a lot safer living in Eltham today than they are in Hackney, Peckham and many other beautiful multicultural areas of London.

Batsy

Originally Posted by FTA69
Open minded people like those who knifed Stephen Lawrence to death because he happened to be black? It may come as a surprise but English people (as well as every other people) are more than capable of racism; yours is a foolish line of argument to go down.

I don't even believe that Norris and Dobson murdered Lawrence. I'm of the belief that Lawrence's murder was gang-related.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/316805

Nodin

Batsy wrote: »

I don't even believe that Norris and Dobson murdered Lawrence. I'm of the belief that Lawrence's murder was gang-related.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/316805

It was gang related. Norris and Dobson were involved in a gang and they killed him.

brimal

Batsy wrote: »

I don't even believe that Norris and Dobson murdered Lawrence. I'm of the belief that Lawrence's murder was gang-related.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/316805

Did you not see the secret video footage of them in the house? Truly shocking behaviour.

If they didn't kill him (which they did), then they would have killed a black person eventually. Absolute scum.