jakedee Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 And I never said they should. It's the thick c**ts in Scotland who slavishly extol the benefits of the UK and applaud when they see Scottish work/jobs heading south that I'm angry at. And that's why independence is inevitable 👠Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 "You did what I wanted. I will now seek revenge on you" Said no one ever It's not a very different a sentiment from what Gove is claiming the EU will do if we vote to stay. We'll be "hostages in the boot of their car" if we vote to remain, I believe he claimed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Me no comprendo? eg whit? Lib Dem politics 101: make up a quote and then smugly point out that no one said it. I believe it's called a "straw man" argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Lib Dem politics 101: make up a quote and then smugly point out that no one said it. I believe it's called a "straw man" argument. For once, I agree totally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted April 27, 2016 Author Share Posted April 27, 2016 More nonsense from Fuzzy Afro. Salmond and Sturgeon signed the Edinburgh Agreement so they must have been happy with the requirement to hold it in 2014. Are you saying that Salmond wanted the franchise to be different from the Holyrood elections plus 16/17 year olds? If so please provide evidence to back up the claim. The fact is that Cameron made no demands at all. Paragraph 10 of the Edinburgh Agreement's memorandum stated - "The Scottish Government’s consultation on the referendum also set out a proposal for extending the franchise to allow 16 and 17 year-olds to vote in the referendum. It will be for the Scottish Government to decide whether to propose extending the franchise for this referendum and how that should be done. It will be for the Scottish Parliament to approve the referendum franchise, as it would be for any referendum on devolved matters." Osborne had wanted Cameron to demand a vote on Devo Max too. Instead, Cameron gave Salmond what he wanted - a straight Yes/No vote. Stop posting lies Fuzzy. everything you say is a lie they were given no choice on the date and it was Cameron that ruled out devo max which the snp wanted, it was London that said it has to be a straight yes or no then held within 18 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 everything you say is a lie they were given no choice on the date and it was Cameron that ruled out devo max which the snp wanted, it was London that said it has to be a straight yes or no then held within 18 months. So Fuzzy is saying that the SNP wanted Devo Max rather than Scottish independence? The only date requirement, agreed by the SNP, was that the referendum had to held in 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 everything you say is a lie they were given no choice on the date and it was Cameron that ruled out devo max which the snp wanted, it was London that said it has to be a straight yes or no then held within 18 months. They clearly were given a choice on the date. It could have been on any day on or before 1st January 2015 after the passing of the s30 Order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thistle_do_nicely Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 So Fuzzy is saying that the SNP wanted Devo Max rather than Scottish independence? The only date requirement, agreed by the SNP, was that the referendum had to held in 2014. Iirc salmond wanted a devo max option but swinney, sturgeon and others in the party pushed for indy only... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Pay no attention to Ad Lib. His joke of a party lost 37 deposits in Scotland last year. I thocht Ad Lib wis the joke but I see whit ye mean :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Iirc salmond wanted a devo max option but swinney, sturgeon and others in the party pushed for indy only... I can't recall Salmond saying that but it's entirely logical. It would explain the flaws in the White Paper, especially on Sterling and EU membership. His policies were consistent with Devo Max but not full independence. I still can't understand why Salmond has gone back Westminster to sit in the Parliament that he wants Scotland to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinkinFighter Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Why is HB posting under a new username? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Why is HB posting under a new username? So is Fuzzy Afro. Was he banned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Is there a link to the Anthony C Pick stuff? Or could someone summarise the relevance? Google brings up a page claiming he's an IT guy who wrote an essay on his "reflections" on "the nation state" and a link to a thread on this forum by the guy that is just gibberish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted April 27, 2016 Author Share Posted April 27, 2016 They clearly were given a choice on the date. It could have been on any day on or before 1st January 2015 after the passing of the s30 Order. So had to be 2014 then, as I said. That was the choice London gave Scotland, hold it in 2014 or not at all. Good that you agree with me for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted April 27, 2016 Author Share Posted April 27, 2016 So Fuzzy is saying that the SNP wanted Devo Max rather than Scottish independence? The only date requirement, agreed by the SNP, was that the referendum had to held in 2014. Erm yes, once again you have no clue what you are talking about, the SNP specificially asked for a third question on devo max, WM said no. Do you know anything about any of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotSquid Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Erm yes, once again you have no clue what you are talking about, the SNP specificially asked for a third question on devo max, WM said no. Do you know anything about any of this? Did they? Got any sources for this claim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted April 27, 2016 Author Share Posted April 27, 2016 Did they? Got any sources for this claim? Google it, if you had a clue you wouldn't need one, it was all over the news at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Erm yes, once again you have no clue what you are talking about, the SNP specificially asked for a third question on devo max, WM said no. Do you know anything about any of this? No they didn't. This is just flatly untrue. Your Scotland Your Referendum, the Scottish Government's consultation document, stated that it was "willing" to include a second question on "further substantial devolution" or "devolution max" "if there [wa]s sufficient support for such a move". At no point did they "specifically ask" for it; the Scottish Ministers were internally divided about whether such a second question should be sought. Moreover, when the Scottish Government did an analysis of the consultation responses to Your Scotland Your Referendum, they found that: Of those respondents who commented on the issue of a second question, 32% were broadly in favour of including a second question and 62% were not; the remainder had unclear or mixed views. Speaking as someone who wanted a second question on the ballot, I will not allow people like you to rewrite history about the SNP and the second question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted April 27, 2016 Author Share Posted April 27, 2016 No they didn't. This is just flatly untrue. Your Scotland Your Referendum, the Scottish Government's consultation document, stated that it was "willing" to include a second question on "further substantial devolution" or "devolution max" "if there [wa]s sufficient support for such a move". At no point did they "specifically ask" for it; the Scottish Ministers were internally divided about whether such a second question should be sought. Moreover, when the Scottish Government did an analysis of the consultation responses to Your Scotland Your Referendum, they found that: Speaking as someone who wanted a second question on the ballot, I will not allow people like you to rewrite history about the SNP and the second question. Polls showed support for that was almost 70% champ, WM ruled it out. That's what happened, you're not in a position to 'allow' anything troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Polls showed support for that was almost 70% champ, WM ruled it out. That's what happened, you're not in a position to 'allow' anything troll. Polls supporting a proposition is not the same thing as the SNP seeking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.