An independent Scotland?

Post Reply
User avatar
Clinton Huxley
19th century monkeybitch.
Posts: 23746
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Clinton Huxley » Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:59 am

Need help moving the goalposts? Salmond was asked in an interview whether he had sought legal advice from his law officers. He said yes. Turns out this was not true. One wonders in what other ways Salmond is being economical with the actualite.....
"I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled"

AND MERRY XMAS TO ONE AND All!

Imagehttp://25kv.co.uk/date_counter.php?date ... 20counting!!![/img-sig]

User avatar
Clinton Huxley
19th century monkeybitch.
Posts: 23746
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:34 pm
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Clinton Huxley » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:04 am

Red Celt wrote:
Clinton Huxley wrote:Ah, assertions.

Turns out there was a god reason Salmond didn't want to release his legal advice re EU membership post independence, he hadn't asked for any. Makes you wonder where else the Scotch Separatists are cutting corners.
It's "Scottish", not "Scotch". Calling Scots "Scotch" stopped pretty much at the same time as black people stopped being called "nig-nogs".

Why do you keep returning to this, like a dog to its vomit?
How very low of you. "scotch" may be obsolescent but to equate it with racism is despicable. "Relating to Scotland or the Scottish people" is what my dictionary says.

So piss off with the racism innuendo.
"I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled"

AND MERRY XMAS TO ONE AND All!

Imagehttp://25kv.co.uk/date_counter.php?date ... 20counting!!![/img-sig]

User avatar
Red Celt
Humanist Misanthrope
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 8:30 pm
About me: Crow Philosopher
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Red Celt » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:31 am

Clinton Huxley wrote:
Red Celt wrote:
Clinton Huxley wrote:Ah, assertions.

Turns out there was a god reason Salmond didn't want to release his legal advice re EU membership post independence, he hadn't asked for any. Makes you wonder where else the Scotch Separatists are cutting corners.
It's "Scottish", not "Scotch". Calling Scots "Scotch" stopped pretty much at the same time as black people stopped being called "nig-nogs".

Why do you keep returning to this, like a dog to its vomit?
How very low of you. "scotch" may be obsolescent but to equate it with racism is despicable. "Relating to Scotland or the Scottish people" is what my dictionary says.

So piss off with the racism innuendo.
I didn't equate it to racism. Learn to read. Or think. Either is good.

It is an obsolete word. There's the connection.

Y'welcome.
Image

User avatar
Santa_Claus
Your Imaginary Friend
Posts: 1985
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:06 pm
About me: Ho! Ho! Ho!
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Santa_Claus » Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:18 am

Clinton Huxley wrote:Need help moving the goalposts? Salmond was asked in an interview whether he had sought legal advice from his law officers. He said yes. Turns out this was not true. One wonders in what other ways Salmond is being economical with the actualite.....
Depends what you mean by "legal advice" - my guess is that Salmond simply played with folks assumptions that he would be stupid enough to try and obtain definative formal legal advice at a time when it would have been impossible to obtain anything meaningful and whose purpose would solely have been to provide ammunition to his opponents, and instead simply had talks / general discussions about what would be needed in the future.......it's all "legal advice".

Have you not noticed that Salmond is smarter (cannier?!) than any of his opponents? :hehe: ........which ironically is my main concern for a future independent Scotland - the rest of the Politicos (who sooner or later will be in power) seem to be inept / dumber than rocks........but that something for the Scottish people to deal with after the referendum. I await the Opponents standing up and explaining that the reason they oppose independence is that they don't think they are bright enough to run the country :biggrin: .
I am Leader of all The Atheists in the world - FACT.

Come look inside Santa's Hole :ninja:

You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by mistermack » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:07 pm

Salmond's interview was just broadcast, when he claimed that he had had legal advice, which he couldn't reveal, that said there wouldn't be a problem with Scotland continuing as a full member of the EC.

He might be able to find a convoluted interpretation of his words, that absolves him of catagorically lying.
But he WAS very much lying. His intended meaning was perfectly clear, and was totally untrue.

Sooner or later, people will realise that words intended to deceive, are lies.
On that basis, Alex Salmond is most certainly a liar.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by mistermack » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:10 pm

Red Celt wrote:Calling Scots "Scotch" stopped pretty much at the same time as black people stopped being called "nig-nogs".Why do you keep returning to this, like a dog to its vomit?
Red Celt wrote:I didn't equate it to racism. Learn to read. Or think. Either is good.

It is an obsolete word. There's the connection.

Y'welcome.
Liar.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Santa_Claus
Your Imaginary Friend
Posts: 1985
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:06 pm
About me: Ho! Ho! Ho!
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Santa_Claus » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:27 pm

mistermack wrote:Salmond's interview was just broadcast, when he claimed that he had had legal advice, which he couldn't reveal, that said there wouldn't be a problem with Scotland continuing as a full member of the EC.

He might be able to find a convoluted interpretation of his words, that absolves him of catagorically lying.
But he WAS very much lying. His intended meaning was perfectly clear, and was totally untrue.

Sooner or later, people will realise that words intended to deceive, are lies.
On that basis, Alex Salmond is most certainly a liar.
You call him a liar - and I call him canny.

But whatever term is correct does not matter - he still has a referendum coming - on the date wanted. and with the 2 options he wanted (he was not dumb enough to have Devomax on the Ballot paper - that will happen eventually anyway if he loses the referendum).......folks can whine about the details of how they got out manouevred, but that simply plays into Salmonds hands.

Will be very interesting to see how Salmond moves the argument forward - my bet is that for many of the awkward questions (some of them genuine, most of them EOTW scare stories) his answer will be that will be for the people to decide after independence (including that the people may elect a non SNP Govt to deal with the questions) and will depend on world events and negotiations with others (EU / UK etc) that can only happen after a Yes vote (Scotland won't become independent the day after!).............the counter argument is that the Scottish people are not bright enough to think for themsleves - which whilst that may be true :hehe: would be one helluva hard sell!

Will also be interesting to see how the other parties respond to the question of what they would do after independence given that it would be such a disasterous event - would they campaign to become a colony again? and if so with whom?......likely the answer would be "the people have spoken and we would work within the new reality" - which does kinda prove that they are tallking nonsense about independence being the EOTW.
I am Leader of all The Atheists in the world - FACT.

Come look inside Santa's Hole :ninja:

You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!

User avatar
Red Celt
Humanist Misanthrope
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 8:30 pm
About me: Crow Philosopher
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Red Celt » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:28 pm

mistermack wrote:
Red Celt wrote:Calling Scots "Scotch" stopped pretty much at the same time as black people stopped being called "nig-nogs".Why do you keep returning to this, like a dog to its vomit?
Red Celt wrote:I didn't equate it to racism. Learn to read. Or think. Either is good.

It is an obsolete word. There's the connection.

Y'welcome.
Liar.
My gran called black people "nig-nogs". She wasn't a racist, she just used antiquated language. Which is what "scotch" is. Don't call people a liar, just because you're dumber than they are. K? K.
Image

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by ronmcd » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:09 pm

mistermack wrote:Salmond's interview was just broadcast, when he claimed that he had had legal advice, which he couldn't reveal, that said there wouldn't be a problem with Scotland continuing as a full member of the EC.

He might be able to find a convoluted interpretation of his words, that absolves him of catagorically lying.
But he WAS very much lying. His intended meaning was perfectly clear, and was totally untrue.

Sooner or later, people will realise that words intended to deceive, are lies.
On that basis, Alex Salmond is most certainly a liar.
Lol. Salmond made clear in that Andrew Neil interview from March that the documents which had already been published were underpinned by legal advice. Of course they are. What he did not say was that he had specific legal advice on whether Scotland would remain in EU. At best (worst?) the interview was unclear, and frankly Salmond shouldn't even have ANSWERED Neil's question about legal advice. Labour have been chasing Salmond for the last 6 months through FOI requests to confirm OR DENY the existence of such advice. Now suddenly they claim he has already admitted it? Why were they bothering chasing him on it through FOI then??

* sigh *

Oh, and in terms of the demands for Scottish govt to reveal legal advice? Where are the demands of the UK government to do the same? UK govt, from november 2011:
But the UK Government has blocked a freedom of information request for its advice on Scotland in Europe.

It said: ''Whilst there is a strong public interest in seeing what legal advice has been provided to the UK Government on the implications of EU membership if Scotland were to achieve independence, we have concluded that this is outweighed by a strong public interest in the Government being able to seek free and frank legal advice.'''

Meanwhile, in a written answer at Westminster, Scotland Office Minister David Mundell admitted: ''I have not received formal representations on the possible status of an independent Scotland within the EU.''

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by ronmcd » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:18 pm

Every single week in Westminister, politicians make claims which are parently untrue. The press and opposition politicians talk of "inconsistency", or "incorrect", or "got his facts wrong" etc. Watch Daily Politics and occassionally an interviewer will ask a politician "are you suggesting X is lying?", to which the answer is almost always "well, no" etc.

But when Alex Salmond makes a qualified and non-specific statement in an interview in March which SOME PEOPLE think is contradicted by Nicola Sturgeon in Holyrood in October ... on the topic of legal advice which is in it's entirety a hypocritical smear against the Scottish govt but for some reason doesnt apply equally to Westminister ... what do we get? Scottish Labour press releases accusing him of "bare-faced lying", accusations of lying in Parliament, and widespread repeats of the accusation in the media.

Interesting, no?

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by mistermack » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:19 pm

Red Celt wrote:My gran called black people "nig-nogs". She wasn't a racist, she just used antiquated language. Which is what "scotch" is. Don't call people a liar, just because you're dumber than they are. K? K.
Yeh, but you ain't your gran, are you?
YOU likened "scotch" to "nig nog". Not your gran.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Red Celt
Humanist Misanthrope
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 8:30 pm
About me: Crow Philosopher
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Red Celt » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:23 pm

mistermack wrote:
Red Celt wrote:My gran called black people "nig-nogs". She wasn't a racist, she just used antiquated language. Which is what "scotch" is. Don't call people a liar, just because you're dumber than they are. K? K.
Yeh, but you ain't your gran, are you?
YOU likened "scotch" to "nig nog". Not your gran.
I swear, the school curriculum seriously needs to include logic. This is painful.
Image

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by mistermack » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:28 pm

Red Celt wrote:I swear, the school curriculum seriously needs to include logic. This is painful.
Agreed.
I'm sorry I called you a liar.
But your logic still stinks.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Red Celt
Humanist Misanthrope
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 8:30 pm
About me: Crow Philosopher
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by Red Celt » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:40 pm

mistermack wrote:
Red Celt wrote:I swear, the school curriculum seriously needs to include logic. This is painful.
Agreed.
I'm sorry I called you a liar.
But your logic still stinks.
Online since '96. Never lied. Never trolled.

And my logic is fine and dandy.
Image

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: An independent Scotland?

Post by mistermack » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:03 pm

Red Celt wrote:And my logic is fine and dandy.
Well, if you simply wanted to point out that scotch is rather out-of-date, you could have compared it to
yankee, or jock, or limey, or boer.

Nig nog is designed to say something rather different. It's not just an out-of-date term, is it?

Try it on your black friends.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 26 guests