The Referendum Thread

[smcc]

The Sunday Herald editor on Radio Scotland this morning said that the main reason for coming out in favour of a "Yes" vote is transparency. None of the newspapers(including The Hootsmon) whose stance is obviously anti-independence has had the courage to say this openly.

[Drew]

They certainly do seem report both sides without bias.

It sort of ventures into Weir's/Barrhead travel territory for me. Although I accept that the media should be seen to be having a far more relevant and prominent role in the debate, simply by the nature of the industry it is.

I also agree wholeheartedly with their editorial views.

I actually kind of agree that an overt stance isn't necessarily a desirable thing, but if other organisations are doing it, I suppose it helps to balance things out a bit.

[oaksoft]

Look at this thread. Most of the Natsi's on here don't engage in debate. All they do is ridicule and smear.

Genuinely hilarious.

[FTOF]

I actually kind of agree that an overt stance isn't necessarily a desirable thing, but if other organisations are doing it, I suppose it helps to balance things out a bit.

It certainly appears to be one lone voice. It could be that some media outlets are are hedging their bets just in case they end up on the "wrong side" depending on how the vote goes.

It is good to see an organisation providing a measured and thoughtful reason for supporting one side of the debate, rather than basing their doom laden views on their potential personal financial losses.

[smcc]

Most of the Natsi's on here don't engage in debate. All they do is ridicule and smear.

I came across this comment today when Oaksoft quoted it.

Who on this thread has done most ridiculing and smearing and who doesn't reply to posts to which he has no answer?

Who uses a redundant apostrophe and can't even manage to get it in the right place?

Stuart, you are a legend only in your own mind.

Edited May 4, 2014 by smcc

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Dicko appears to be obsessed with oil & gas. Most of us who don't live in fear know it's not about the oil & gas...

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Alex Salmond will provide plenty of gas if Scotland goes independent.

I'm sure he'll provide plenty if we don't as well...a bit like yourself. What's your point caller?

[Stuart Dickson]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-should-apologise-poor-3494580

Well said Paddy Ashdown. I said as much last week. Salmond is a despicable disgrace of a man, a cretin on the world stage, a coward of the highest order and a terrorist apologist who will always turn a blind eye to murder on a mass scale. The fact that so many Scots think this fanny represents them and their views speaks volumes for what kind of "more equal society" they would have us live in.

[Stuart Dickson]

The Atlantic side of Scotland hasn't been explored because the UK government won't allow it because they want a clear route for Trident to get in and out and they don't want any permanent structures getting in the way. That's why. We are extracting oil from incredible depths just now, regularly up to and exceeding 35000ft (inc water depth plus hole depth). The water depth varies but on the shelf will likely be less than 1000ft which is nothing. I know who would lay claim to it all but certainly Scotland would have a good claim to many blocks. Also if current maritime boundaries are honoured then an independent Scotland would get 90% of current North Sea blocks too.

I'm the first to admit that the UK isn't the worst place in the world to live. I have certainly enjoyed many benefits and privileges growing up here, but it is getting worse. The gap between rich and poor is growing and it is not a good trend. You seem to be arguing for better the devil we know.....but there is just as much uncertainty about that devil too. I don't really care too much about the EU and I don't oppose the in/out vote that will likely come after a NO vote. I only point it out as it is one of the biggest campaigning points of the NO campaign, whereas there is no certainty of staying in the EU either way.

You never know who you can believe these days. You keep going on about the £12bn deficit but there are similar articles that claim Scotland would have been £8 billion better off if we were independent for the last 5 years...

Similarly, to assess if we could actually balance the books, we are being told that Scotland is actually one of the richest countries in the world per head and here are 10 facts that show that Scotland would be a wealthy nation.

I've spent enough time on this forum to know that statistics can be skewed so I try not to blindly believe anything I read. But if Scotland is such a drain on England and they are actually bailing us out (whereas others argue that Scotland are a net contributor of tax) then why are they so desperate to keep us?

You ask for evidence that something would have been done better in the past or evidence that things will be done better in the future. Obviously this is completely impossible since the future is unknown and history can't be changed so I think this is pretty weak arguments. Unfortunately all we have to go on is the word of politicians who are as bad as each other. One side saying everything is rosy so lets stick with it; the other saying we could tweak stuff and make it better for Scotland. The future is unknown either way, but I don't want to look back in 50 years and regret that we didn't have the balls to make such an important decision out of fear of change. In all honesty, I think for the average person they wouldn't see too much difference in their day to day life after independence but I think that the potential is there for the country as a whole to be better balanced and to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.

Of course there should be evidence. Look, if I want a mortgage to buy a house the bank will check that I can afford the repayments and they'll ask me for proof of my earnings etc. Same applies to any government. If they are making promises like free nursery care for everyone then they should be able to show how they can finance it - because without a costing plan it's just a hollow pledge from someone who will say anything to get you to back them. The evidence on Scotlands current budget figures shows that Scotland is currently being subsidised by the rest of the UK and because the SNP based all their costings on an overly ambitious oil price against all their advisers recommendations they've overspent Scotlands budget by a massive £12Bn. Statistics can be bent, you're absolutely right about that, but this isn't spin, it's hard fact.

I agree with much of what you are saying about the oil industry. I don't think the reason the UK hasn't exploited the Continental Shelf is because of Trident - you may be confusing that with the Clyde estuary and the conversation I was having with LS a few days ago - but beyond that I don't think I've got much to argue against in there. One thing I would warn you about though is that if you are sourcing your stories from Nationalist Propaganda websites you aren't going to get a a balanced view of the information. One of your links claims that Scotland has a rich and diverse economy, but a look at our export figures highlights the weakness - and the fact that we are very heavily reliant on oil and whisky to keep us afloat. Check the figures, which are provided on government websites, ignore the press releases and use your own judgement to see the real picture. You'd do that when it comes to football, so why treat something as important as a referendum that will affect not just you, but your kids, grandkids etc for ever with less rigour.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[Vambo57]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-should-apologise-poor-3494580

Well said Paddy Ashdown. I said as much last week. Salmond is a despicable disgrace of a man, a cretin on the world stage, a coward of the highest order and a terrorist apologist who will always turn a blind eye to murder on a mass scale. The fact that so many Scots think this fanny represents them and their views speaks volumes for what kind of "more equal society" they would have us live in.

Typical Natsi/Commi response.

What was that about abuse and smears?

Ir really is hypocracy of the highest order.

Thank you both.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Vambo57

[Stuart Dickson]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/scotland-27236972

So its ok for the UK government to be coy with Putin regarding them sucking up with him earlier this year?

You also write about turning a blind eye to murder on a mass scale. So you think its alright for the UK government to release murderers after only a few years and in 187 cases let them off all together?

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/regional/amnesty-letters-to-187-ira-suspects-a-disgrace-1-5900800

No I don't. However releasing IRA prisoners as part of the Anglo Irish Peace Agreement that has meant relative peace in the province is one thing, turning a blind eye to mass genocide in Kosovo and Serbia because you are too cowardly to act is quite another.

I'll tell you this for free Cockles, the SNP have f**ked up big time. Here they have their chance at Independence and through their own stupidity and power struggles they've landed up being led by Alex Salmond. Had Jim Sillars taken you into this referendum there would have been no doubt about the outcome. Salmond simply isn't capable of being a credible statesman.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[salmonbuddie]

Been thinking about this whole certainty vs uncertainty thing. It's true that independence may or may not see an improvement, that's the uncertainty. It's my opinion that we will be better off and that rUK will take the opportunity to improve its own democratic system, but it is only my opinion. For certainty, you have to stick with the union. We will definitely be worse off, that's a certainty.

Thank you, BT, for clarifying things for me.

[RickMcD]

Been thinking about this whole certainty vs uncertainty thing. It's true that independence may or may not see an improvement, that's the uncertainty. It's my opinion that we will be better off and that rUK will take the opportunity to improve its own democratic system, but it is only my opinion. For certainty, you have to stick with the union. We will definitely be worse off, that's a certainty.

Thank you, BT, for clarifying things for me.

I think I possibly understand what you may have been trying to say, but I'm not sure and if you read it over again maybe you'll understand why I don't understand completely. At least maybe.

[Stuart Dickson]

Been thinking about this whole certainty vs uncertainty thing. It's true that independence may or may not see an improvement, that's the uncertainty. It's my opinion that we will be better off and that rUK will take the opportunity to improve its own democratic system, but it is only my opinion. For certainty, you have to stick with the union. We will definitely be worse off, that's a certainty.

Thank you, BT, for clarifying things for me.

Aha. More proof that the Natsis are anti democratic.

[FTOF]

Personally I would think an individual who beat up his aged father would be more deserving of the terms "despicable disgrace of a man" and "coward".

As for the word "cretin"; you only need to read his posts...............................................

Still, it's good to see such irrational hatred channelled into another a fantastic meltdown.

[Stuart Dickson]

Personally I would think an individual who beat up his aged father would be more deserving of the terms "despicable disgrace of a man" and "coward".

As for the word "cretin"; you only need to read his posts...............................................

Still, it's good to see such irrational hatred channelled into another a fantastic meltdown.

Yeah but you've always had a strange idea of moral value. Today we see you claiming that a 16 year old boy defending his 15 year old girlfriend from sectarian abuse from his father is more cowardly than doing nothing except turning a blind eye to 10,000+ genocidal deaths in Serbia.

Got to admit it FTOF, I had thought my opinion of you couldn't really get much lower, but you keep proving me wrong....

[Stuart Dickson]

Letting terrorists free is only acceptable because it suits your agenda,

So who is it thats turning a blind eye and too cowardly to act to all the killings in Syria?

Not at all. I've stated quite clearly my opinion is that terrorists should never be "let go". I don't think the freeing of terrorists on both sides in Northern Ireland offered any justice to any of the victims families. However at least when it was done in Northern Ireland Mo Mowlems aims were honourable. She wanted to bring an end to nearly 100 years of senseless killing and by and large those aims have been achieved.

You talk about Syria which is interesting. If you'll remember David Cameron and William Hague brought forward a motion to Parliament for military action against the Assad government, which appeared to have been using chemical weapons against their own people. It was voted down in an act of democracy and now the UK Governments hands are tied. The vote that day went 285 Against, 272 For. All six SNP MP's voted against the action - taking their cowardice into the halls of Westminster. Now you want to use the way they voted to beat the Coalition government for lack of action. You are a hypocrite of the highest order!

You'll also need to give me some sort of spin that defends Alex Salmonds actions over Serbia and Kosovo which doesn't show him out to be the contemptible coward that he is. The SNP were alone in their calls for the UK to ignore the genocide in the former Yugoslavia and Alex Salmond condemned NATO action to end the massacres that were going on. Thanks to NATO, and in huge part to Paddy Ashdown, order was restored, peace broke out, and settlements were negotiated and warlords brought to justice. If Salmond had his way we'd have all ignored it and let the killing continue unabated.

Finally, you'll need to provide me with some sort of spin that shows that Alex Salmond makes a good, honourable, trustworthy leader when his response to Russian involvement in the annexing of a neighbouring country, and the threat of invasion leads him to do an interview where he states his admiration for the Russian leader.

Salmond, the modern day Neville Chamberlain, but without the honourable intentions.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[easternbud]

You may have your own opinipn about Salmond. My fiancee interviewed him once and said hes a smug twat, i remember him being at the opening of Greenhill Road and agree with her. However i will be voting yes because i think it is the right thing to do and we can vote for and get the government we want in the first elections.

Its a choice between the certainty of the crap we have now or the possibility of being better and in control. Im a control freak, what can i say

[Stuart Dickson]

You may have your own opinipn about Salmond. My fiancee interviewed him once and said hes a smug twat, i remember him being at the opening of Greenhill Road and agree with her. However i will be voting yes because i think it is the right thing to do and we can vote for and get the government we want in the first elections.

Its a choice between the certainty of the crap we have now or the possibility of being better and in control. Im a control freak, what can i say

What we have now is certainly not crap. There are certainly things which the UK fails at. Our NHS is hopelessly inefficient, we're too generous with welfare and we make it too easy for the workshy to choose unemployment as a career option, and our state education system seems to be failing to deliver anything like value for money in each of the four constituent parts of the United Kingdom.

However as part of the UK we get to enjoy being part of one of the worlds leading powers, one of the worlds richest countries, a country where we enjoy amongst the highest rates of pay,one of the lowest rates of tax, one of the lowest rates of unemployment and one of the highest standards of living anywhere in the world. The idea that we should vote all that away for an unsubstantiated notion that we might be able to do things better on our own is ridiculous and can only really be explained away through many Scots xenophobic hatred of the English.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[easternbud]

I hate to disappoint you Stuart but the NHS is now and always has been dealt with in Scotland. It has never been a UK matter. Ditto education and going on a Sunday to talk to the great sky fairy.

We are different, our systems are different and our politics are different. I believe the best thing we can do is ensure we control things and not Westminster.

Edited May 5, 2014 by easternbud

[Stuart Dickson]

Talk about hypocrisy.

I see you conveniently forgot about the 30 Tories and 9 Lib Dems that voted against action.

You'll not be able to provide proof of the other highlighted paragraph because you know and we all know you made it up. You just can't help yourself, it's same old dicko lying again.

I certainly haven't forgotten about them, or more importantly about the way my local MP voted that day as well but that wasn't the point you were making. You were attempting to claim that David Cameron had turned a blind eye to genocide in Syria in the same way Salmond did in Serbia. Not only are you wrong, YOUR representatives in the House of Commons voted on the side of cowardice that day too.

You are the hypocrite Cockles and it's doing you no favours at all.

[Stuart Dickson]

I hate to disappoint you Stuart but the NHS is now and always has been dealt with in Scotland. It has never been a UK matter. Ditto education and going on a Sunday to talk to the great sky fairy.

We are different, our systems are different and our politics are different. I believe the beat thing we can do is ensure we control things and not Westminster.

And Scotland is currently a constituent part of the United Kingdom.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make though, unless you are claiming Scottish responsibility for the lack of value for taxpayers money in education and the gross inefficiencies in the NHS. Either way though there is absolutely no evidence that an Independent Scotland would be able to either any better than it is now.

[easternbud]

The point is there may be no evidence an independent Scotland will do better but there is plenty of evidence it cant do any worse.

We can do things on out own, it comes down to whether not we want to. I do.

[Stuart Dickson]

The point is there may be no evidence an independent Scotland will do better but there is plenty of evidence it cant do any worse.

We can do things on out own, it comes down to whether not we want to. I do.

Really?

Go on then - show your evidence.

With an annual budget deficit of £12Bn and with no apparent plans to reverse this I think it's very much the case that an Independent Scotland could do a great deal worse but if you've got evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[oaksoft]

Really?

Go on then - show your evidence.

With an annual budget deficit of £12Bn and with no apparent plans to reverse this I think it's very much the case that an Independent Scotland could do a great deal worse but if you've got evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it.

The debate is passin you by.

Most people who vote Yes will do so from the heart.

Few people are motivated enough to seek certainty or facts - whatever the hell they are.

You are talking to yourself as is BT.