Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

Re Catalonia (they have their own language by the way and it is spoken by Catalonians there) - their region is normally thought to include the Balearic Islands (Mallorca, Menorca) but Mallorca for example does not consider itself part of Catalonia, they are Mallorcean, with their own dialect of Catalan, which they speak (lessons in school are in that language to the despair of non mallorcean parents and to the detriment of their children.

So the SNP Natland vision is not unique, and the tribal instinct goes as far down as there are power hungry politicians to exploit it (and gullible acolytes).

Freedom for Dorset!

I really must convene a meeting in our Village Hall. Maybe we'll have a Referendum; after all the village was invaded by that foreign king from Winchester a thousand years ago. We could have our own embassies, and an air force. We export blueberries, so no problem about finance.

You seem to have missed the 100 or so other countries that have gone independent over the last century. If it had been down to you, there would still be a British Empire including India, Malaysia and Malta. Things change.

Scotland didn't become a part of England in 1707. It joined a political union. "Combining two parliaments". Where does Dorset or Yorkshire come into it ?

The term 'unionist' is referring directly to the below Treaty. Those who want independence ( in Scotland specifically, as opposed to Catalonia with a completely different history. ) want to dissolve the 'combining of the two parliaments' through which both ancient Kingdoms, of which Scotland was one, came to be governed. If you spent more time reading up on basic UK history, rather than Spanish history, and trying to chuck Dorset in there for some strange and weird reason, you'd know all this.

The Treaty of Union is the name given to the agreement that led to the creation of Great Britain,[1][2][3][4] the political union of the Kingdom of England (which included Wales) and the Kingdom of Scotland, which took effect on 1 May 1707. The details of the Treaty were agreed on 22 July 1706, and separate Acts of Union were then passed by the parliaments of England and Scotland to ratify the Treaty...

...The united Kingdom of Great Britain was born on 1 May 1707, shortly after the parliaments of Scotland and England had ratified the Treaty of Union by each approving Acts of Union combining the two parliaments and the two royal titles. Scotland's crown, sceptre, and sword of state remained at Edinburgh Castle. Queen Anne (already Queen of both England and Scotland) formally became the first occupant of the unified British throne, with Scotland sending forty-five Members to the new House of Commons of Great Britain, as well as representative peers to the House of Lords..

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

so you definitely don't think that democratic values, with people of today making their own decisions, trump historic autocratic undemocratic decisions of long ago.
If some-one living is democratic, liberal Scotland can believe that madness, I guess it's easy to see by the ISIL wants to reconquer Spain, after all it was once theirs.

Perhaps, instead of another referendum, there should be a independent international legal constitutional commission to decide whether the treaty can be set aside by one partner.

The Treaty can be set aside by one partner via an independence referendum, run under current electoral and internationally recognised democratic rules. Even the most ardent unionist wouldn't deny that to be the case. Which is why we had the first one.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You seem to have missed the 100 or so other countries that have gone independent over the last century. If it had been down to you, there would still be a British Empire including India, Malaysia and Malta. Things change.

Scotland didn't become a part of England in 1707. It joined a political union. "Combining two parliaments". Where does Dorset or Yorkshire come into it ?

The term 'unionist' is referring directly to the below Treaty. Those who want independence ( in Scotland specifically, as opposed to Catalonia with a completely different history. ) want to dissolve the 'combining of the two parliaments' through which both ancient Kingdoms, of which Scotland was one, came to be governed. If you spent more time reading up on basic UK history, rather than Spanish history, and trying to chuck Dorset in there for some strange and weird reason, you'd know all this.

could you give us the specific references that apply to the breaking of the union.

.string.

CLAPTON wrote: »

could you give us the specific references that apply to the breaking of the union.

Yes I would like to see that.

Has anyone found a direct link to the actual Treaty / Act or whatever it was called. Not an interpretation, but the actual document.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

could you give us the specific references that apply to the breaking of the union.

There are none. Why would there be.. it's a Treaty of Union. Drafted 300 odd years ago. But Treaties are amended, added to, modified or declared void every day. Nothing lasts forever. It was actually broken in 1999 with one sentence...

" The Scottish Parliament, which adjourned on March 25, 1707, is hereby reconvened."

CLAPTON

.string. wrote: »

Yes I would like to see that.

Has anyone found a direct link to the actual Treaty / Act or whatever it was called. Not an interpretation, but the actual document.

it wouldn't make any real difference, because if, for one moment, it would seem that the 1707 treaty didn't allow an exit, Shakey would immediate become a believer in the democratic imperative and all that rubbish about treaties and 'nation ' would be air brushed just like RBS and HBOS being 'scottish' has vanished from SNP history.
Does anyone remember the celtic arc of prosperity?

.string.

That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next ensuing the date hereof and forever after be United into One Kingdom by the Name of Great Britain

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/7/section/I

Hmmmm.

.string.

Shakey will now explain in spun detail why it is democratic not to keep faith with a binding agreement.

Generali

.string. wrote: »

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/7/section/I

Hmmmm.

As Prince, the great statesman, once said. Forever...that's a mighty long time.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There are none. Why would there be.. it's a Treaty of Union. Drafted 300 odd years ago. But Treaties are amended, added to, modified or declared void every day. Nothing lasts forever. It was actually broken in 1999 with one sentence...

I'm sure that a unilateral revision of agreements will be the Iscotland stock in trade, starting with sharing the debt