The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

.string.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

@.string.
Its not pretty obvious that the SNP want to hold the referendum in 2018 in October possible.
Your trying to squeeze in a scenario that is not true to make the answer to your liking.

Nicola Sturgeon has accepted this would be post Brexit negotiations.
It seems shes mocked by being more flexible and adjusting the date

Nicola Sturgeon MOCKED as she 'retreats' over independence referendum timing



Why are you so insistent to try and hold to the previous potential date as discussed between TM and NS, when flexibility and clarity has been made to concide post Brexit negotiations?

No ISTL Sturgeon has form on misleading people and I for one am not falling for it. I have no doubt what I wrote was correct. In Sturgeon's Section 30 letter is written "between the autumn of next year and the spring of 2019." The link you gave was about events before that. She really has form in saying one thing and doing another.

It would this particular discussion if you defined after Brexit. Do you include knowledge of the Trading agreement in that and the Free Trade options. Do you include a definitive statement on the schedule for joining the EU and agreements reached between Sturgeon and the EU?

.string.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

... Why are you so insistent to try and hold to the previous potential date as discussed between TM and NS, when flexibility and clarity has been made to concide post Brexit negotiations?

I missed reacting to that, as worded it's wrong, I was not insisting on those dates myself. Maybe you meant something else.

Anyway those dates may have been discussed but they were in no way agreed - see the following (I linked to this before)

A row erupted following of the two leaders in Glasgow last week, when the Scottish Government claimed Mrs May had agreed that the terms of Brexit would be made clear within Ms Sturgeon’s timetable. Downing Street denied any such assurance had been given.

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/general-election/snp-seize-on-claim-brexit-terms-will-be-clear-by-2019-1-4411992

.string.

Hamish ? Any response to my query?

IveSeenTheLight

.string. wrote: »

I missed reacting to that, as worded it's wrong, I was not insisting on those dates myself. Maybe you meant something else.

Anyway those dates may have been discussed but they were in no way agreed - see the following (I linked to this before)

From your link

A SNP spokesman said Mrs May’s comments supported the timetable set out by Nicola Sturgeon, who has formally requested a second independence referendum by spring 2019, when the First Minister says “both the terms of Brexit and the implications and opportunities of independence” will be “clear”.

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/general-election/snp-seize-on-claim-brexit-terms-will-be-clear-by-2019-1-4411992

So why are you insisting asking posters if they believe an Oct 2018 is achievable?

.string.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

From your link



So why are you insisting asking posters if they believe an Oct 2018 is achievable?

Well you are quoting the SNP and what Sturgeon said, I was quoting the bit which said there was no agreement with May.

It is also not after “both the terms of Brexit and the implications and opportunities of independence” will be “clear”.

Yah_Boo_Sux

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Are you considering voting for SNP in this GE?

Then you wonder why you get accused, posting two answers to one post?
Your love of your own voice & opinion is painfully evident.

What is it, do you just not know how to use a single post?


The SNP do not "adapt", they just take advantage of any opportunity to further their obsession for independence.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

No ISTL Sturgeon has form on misleading people and I for one am not falling for it. I have no doubt what I wrote was correct. In Sturgeon's Section 30 letter is written "between the autumn of next year and the spring of 2019." The link you gave was about events before that. She really has form in saying one thing and doing another.

It would this particular discussion if you defined after Brexit. Do you include knowledge of the Trading agreement in that and the Free Trade options. Do you include a definitive statement on the schedule for joining the EU and agreements reached between Sturgeon and the EU?

It's UK - Brexit timing string. The SNP don't have anything to do with it.

1) Article 50 - 18 months negotiations - 6 months to ratify <---- Scotland votes.

2) Or Article 50 - 18 months negotitations - extentions of talks if needed - 6 months to ratify <---- Scotland votes.

No one is going to be hanging about for years afterwards 'seeing how it all works out'. Bad deal or no deal at all <---- Scotland votes.

I hope this is clear enough for you. You can insert the dates yourself given that Article 50 was triggered in March 2017. I think you'll find the window Sturgeon is talking about is during the accepted for now 6 months ratification period between Sept 18 - March 19. Should talks be extended, then the vote will still be held during the 6 month ratification period, but the ratification period would be later than the currently proposed timetable.

And just so you are 100% clear because you seem to be tying yourself up in knots over a very simple premise here. During the 6 month Brexit ratification period, whenever it occurs< ---- Scotland votes too.

Also no, the Scottish Parliament won't be hanging about waiting for news on trade deals since they'll want to minimise, as far as they can, possible damage to future trading either via the EU/EFTA/EEA due to trading laws and regulations being changed or gotten rid of here in the UK as it leaves the Single Market.

Shaka_Zulu

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It's UK - Brexit timing string. The SNP don't have anything to do with it.

1) Article 50 - 18 months negotiations - 6 months to ratify <---- Scotland votes.

2) Or Article 50 - 18 months negotitations - extentions of talks if needed - 6 months to ratify <---- Scotland votes.

No one is going to be hanging about for years afterwards 'seeing how it all works out'. Bad deal or no deal at all <---- Scotland votes.

3) SNP get gubbed in GE <

---

Scotland DOES NOT VOTE

Think this is the most likely scenario!

(Just to save a multitude of posts from ISTL et al I am defining gubbed as <35% of the popular vote)

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

:yawn:



It was a direct response to AMSJ, who has had a repeated obsession with labelling me as a troll to which I responded that I got the message and would not feed him anymore.

I'm happy to debate and agree we should not be labelling debaters trolls, especially not on mass

Aye, yawn is right enough.
You say you "agree we should not be labelling debaters trolls" but how many times have you accused?????
And saying it isn't enough, naw - you need graphics too!


Still wondering why you get called troll - apart from obviously being argumentative? ? ?


Yesterday, ISTL posts here: 26!
Yesterday, Jock posts here: 8
And every day the same.
Uh huh.
Soaybe "spammer" is appropriate too.

Shakethedisease

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

3) SNP get gubbed in GE <

---

Scotland DOES NOT VOTE

Think this is the most likely scenario!

(Just to save a multitude of posts from ISTL et al I am defining gubbed as <35% of the popular vote)

Scotland will vote either way since it's already been initiated from Holyrood, not Westminster <--- Scotland votes

And in any case I was replying to string's repeated misunderstandings about the timings of any future vote. <35% ? I guess that's what you're hoping for, am not sure it's the most likely scenario though.