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

Shakethedisease

Nasqueron wrote: »

Ah yes the classic logical fallacies of a poor debate:


Deflection
Attacking source
Strawman


Polls: people always pick and choose them if they support what they want. The fact that CONSISTENTLY leave have not been close to even 50% shows a trend. The Scottish referendum polls showed remain would win, remain won. The YouGov final poll before the vote was within 1%. The EU referendum polls showed, within a margin of error, the polls were too close to call. The UK election was an anomaly because no-one expected Corbyn to promise all that unfunded nonsense and for the general public to believe it. 45% isn't a starting point, that was the high point of support and what you got in the last vote. The Scotsman is not the only poll as I said (classic attempt to ignore all the evidence and focus only on bits you don't like). Given May's terrible job, given article 50, given no deal, given all the factors, SNP should be rocking 60+% support for leaving without even having to get out of bed in the morning. 45% was the result last time and leave hasn't gained a single step.

45% is the estimated starting percentage. No official campaigning has been launched as yet. Anything else is speculation.

Nothing I wrote was uninformed


The UK government controls the pound. If Scotland voted leave, the UK government can refuse to allow another country to use their currency, thus they have no central bank like BoE to back their currency so they get a crazy low credit rating and massive borrowing costs. Look at the countries that unofficially use the dollar and how bad their economies are without any central bank. Moreover, joining the EU as a new country, which Scotland would have to, under Article 49, they would be expected to join the Euro.

I'm afraid you are uninformed. Scotland can indeed use the £. The rest of your post is getting somewhere into the nitty gritty.. but Scotland CAN use the £. Scotland also 'might' be 'expected' to use the Euro if joining the EU, but wouldn't pass any critera for doing for for a very long time. You're again trying to pass of statments in a very black and white way, when the reality is far more complicated and needs context.

Oh and by the way the UK IS Scotland plus England ( and Wales ). Without Scotland the UK won't be controlling anything I'm afraid.... since it won't actually exist anymore. You should take this into account when casually waving airy hands about who controls what. No Scotland, no UK.

The EU categorically stated that Scotland could not "transition" into the EU, it was made crystal clear that Salmond's argument was false. Article 48 (Salmond's lie) was never written to allow new members to join the EU (source here - LSE). It would also require UK government approval as well as approval from all member states. At the time Spain ruled out approving it to discourage the Basque people.

The EU has ruled nothing out, nor nothing in. The rest are newspaper headlines and comments from EU officials or similar. Some EU officials take the view that Scotland transitioning into the EU would be very easy indeed ( since Scotland already complies with most criteria given it's a member already ). See :-

20/06/2018A key European Union figure has claimed it is a ‘simple fact’ there is no big obstacle to an independent Scotland rejoining the bloc after the UK’s departure.

Guy Verhofstadt, who is the European Parliament’s chief negotiator on Brexit, was appearing before the Home Affairs committee in the House of Commons this afternoon when he was challenged by Scottish Conservative MP Douglas Ross on comments he had made on an independent Scotland joining the EU.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/eu-negotiator-simple-fact-independent-scotland-could-join-eu-1-4757519



I realise this doesn't suit your agenda and is far more recent than the same old flannel from 2014 but you did ask for evidence.

NATO themselves said Scotland could not assume to be a member (source here) not least because of the defence spending needed but also all 28 members would have to approve. SNP's opposition to nuclear weapons was also a problem.

You said NATO had ruled out Scotland as a member. Now you're saying 'not to assume'. There's a big difference. Scotland currently is home to the UK's Nuclear weapons. Upon independence, and regardless of the SNP's opposition to anything.. And do let's bear in mind the SNP will probably split soon after indy and won't be in charge of Scotland forever as you assume.... it's going it take time to find those subs etc a new home. NATO is surely aware of this AND Scotland's geographical importance given the GIUK.

The GIUK gap is an area in the northern Atlantic Ocean that forms a naval choke point. Its name is an acronym for Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom, the gap being the open ocean between these three landmasses. The term is typically used in relation to military topics.

Feel free to reply again without any evidence though.

I've been replying for years here with evidence. I just get a little bored having to present the same evidence over and over again for those who haven't got much of a clue. If you wish a real debate, you're going to have to do a little more ( and better ) research than tired old soundbites from the Daily Express or the Mail.

Shakethedisease

Good to see Alex Salmond winning his case today.

The Scottish government has admitted acting unlawfully while investigating sexual harassment claims against Alex Salmond.
Allegations against the former first minister, which he denies, were made to the Scottish government a year ago.
The government has now admitted it breached its own guidelines by appointing an investigating officer who had "prior involvement" in the case.
As a result, it conceded defeat in its legal fight with Mr Salmond.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46428570


It always did have the whiff of witchunt about it.

An unlawful investigation with apparent bias, where the investigator encouraged the complainants before being appointed to the investigation.

Ex editor of the Daily Record says

Murray Foote‏
Three possible scenarios re Salmond:

1. There was a concerted civil service plot to nail Salmond

2. The disciplinary procedure was deliberately compromised at the most basic level to allow any future appeal to succeed.

3. Rampant ineptitude.

.. and the current Daily Record editor has some questions to answer as well given the amount of 'leaks' they published endangering still to be concluded police proceedings.

Cetshwayo

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Good to see Alex Salmond winning his case today.

Highlighting the Scottish Government's ineptitude and you think they can be trusted to run Scotland.

Shakethedisease

Cetshwayo wrote: »

Highlighting the Scottish Government's ineptitude and you think they can be trusted to run Scotland.

Is not the actual Scottish Government MSP's etc. It's the Scottish Government civil service.
But anyway, Salmond won this particular case plus his expenses. Let's hope fairness prevails in any other cases currently running.

loadsacash

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Good to see Alex Salmond winning his case today. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46428570


It always did have the whiff of witchunt about it. Ex editor of the Daily Record says .. and the current Daily Record editor has some questions to answer as well given the amount of 'leaks' they published endangering still to be concluded police proceedings.

A Witchunt? The Civil Servant at the center of this - Leslie Evans is married to an SNP activist isn't she?

Its getting interesting now

cogito

Shakethedisease wrote: »

45% is the estimated starting percentage. No official campaigning has been launched as yet. Anything else is speculation.


I'm afraid you are uninformed. Scotland can indeed use the £. The rest of your post is getting somewhere into the nitty gritty.. but Scotland CAN use the £. Scotland also 'might' be 'expected' to use the Euro if joining the EU, but wouldn't pass any critera for doing for for a very long time. You're again trying to pass of statments in a very black and white way, when the reality is far more complicated and needs context.

Oh and by the way the UK IS Scotland plus England ( and Wales ). Without Scotland the UK won't be controlling anything I'm afraid.... since it won't actually exist anymore. You should take this into account when casually waving airy hands about who controls what. No Scotland, no UK.


The EU has ruled nothing out, nor nothing in. The rest are newspaper headlines and comments from EU officials or similar. Some EU officials take the view that Scotland transitioning into the EU would be very easy indeed ( since Scotland already complies with most criteria given it's a member already ). See :-https://www.scotsman.com/news/eu-negotiator-simple-fact-independent-scotland-could-join-eu-1-4757519



I realise this doesn't suit your agenda and is far more recent than the same old flannel from 2014 but you did ask for evidence.
You said NATO had ruled out Scotland as a member. Now you're saying 'not to assume'. There's a big difference. Scotland currently is home to the UK's Nuclear weapons. Upon independence, and regardless of the SNP's opposition to anything.. And do let's bear in mind the SNP will probably split soon after indy and won't be in charge of Scotland forever as you assume.... it's going it take time to find those subs etc a new home. NATO is surely aware of this AND Scotland's geographical importance given the GIUK. I've been replying for years here with evidence. I just get a little bored having to present the same evidence over and over again for those who haven't got much of a clue. If you wish a real debate, you're going to have to do a little more ( and better ) research than tired old soundbites from the Daily Express or the Mail.

The EU official who you refer to was not just some lackey but the EU Commission President Barroso who said that it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for Scotland to join the Union.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26215963

If that is what you mean by the EU ruling nothing in or out, then that is semantics of the highest order. Well done.

As to your comment about Scotland being able to continue to use the £, that is also correct. It would however preclude Scotland from being able to join the EU as you know very well as one of the conditions of membership is that a country must have its own central bank as Montenegro has recently discovered. And of course, not having your own currency would mean SINO - Scottish Independence in Name Only.
The more you distort the facts, the less credibility you have.

Cetshwayo

loadsacash wrote: »

A Witchunt? The Civil Servant at the center of this - Leslie Evans is married to an SNP activist isn't she?

Its getting interesting now

She was also appointed by the Scottish government. Internal Nat witch hunt gone bad.

Shakethedisease

cogito wrote: »

The EU official who you refer to was not just some lackey but the EU Commission President Barroso who said that it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for Scotland to join the Union.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26215963

If that is what you mean by the EU ruling nothing in or out, then that is semantics of the highest order. Well done.

As to your comment about Scotland being able to continue to use the £, that is also correct. It would however preclude Scotland from being able to join the EU as you know very well as one of the conditions of membership is that a country must have its own central bank as Montenegro has recently discovered. And of course, not having your own currency would mean SINO - Scottish Independence in Name Only.
The more you distort the facts, the less credibility you have.

The EU consists as you know consists of many countries. Barroso was indeed ( an outgoing ) EU official. The EU as whole has ruled nothing out, nor nothing in. Because they've never been officially asked. Other EU officals, have far more recently, stated the opposite.

Scotland using the £. You have to make it clear if you mean Scotland simply using the £ or else staying in a currency union with England/Wales.. ( since the UK won't exist of course )... there's a difference isn't there. Something not everyone was keen to point out in 2014 when they were scaring old ladies on doorsteps with tales of not being able to collect pensions in £'s the day after a Yes vote.

Distorting the facts I will leave up to yourself and a few other posters on this thread who glean all their info from the Daily Express. Then make categoric statements like 'Scotland can't use the £' only to have to backtrack when actual facts are provided. Scotland CAN use the £ after independence. However there are a myriad of other factors in play too.

cogito

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The EU consists as you know consists of many countries. Barroso was indeed ( an outgoing ) EU official. The EU as whole has ruled nothing out, nor nothing in. Because they've never been officially asked. Other EU officals, have far more recently, stated the opposite.

Scotland using the £. You have to make it clear if you mean Scotland simply using the £ or else staying in a currency union with England/Wales.. ( since the UK won't exist of course )... there's a difference isn't there. Something not everyone was keen to point out in 2014 when they were scaring old ladies on doorsteps with tales of not being able to collect pensions in £'s the day after a Yes vote.

Distorting the facts I will leave up to yourself and a few other posters on this thread who glean all their info from the Daily Express. Then make categoric statements like 'Scotland can't use the £' only to have to backtrack when actual facts are provided. Scotland CAN use the £ after independence. However there are a myriad of other factors in play too.

I never read the Express so wouldn't know what it says. And I've never said that Scotland can't use the £. Of course it could but it could never be in a currency union without the agreement of the RUK government and why would they agree to that?

And of course Scotland could apply to join the EU but if you think that the EU would waive their entry requirements, you are likely to be disappointed.

Shakethedisease

loadsacash wrote: »

A Witchunt? The Civil Servant at the center of this - Leslie Evans is married to an SNP activist isn't she?

Its getting interesting now

Yes. A witch hunt if the below is anywhere near true.. which does seem to be the case since it was the basis on which the whole court case collapsed.

In January 2018, shortly after starting at the Scottish Government, Mackinnon sought them out and – as it was carefully put in court today - spoke to them in a manner “bordering on encouragement to proceed with formal complaints” against Alex Salmond.

It appears this was a process, not just one meeting. Again in the language used in court today, there was a “significant amount of direct personal contact” between Mackinnon and the complainants.

At this stage the complaints were brought to the attention of Leslie Evans, the Permanent Secretary – assuming she was not the one who instigated Mackinnon to act originally. Incredibly, Evans then appoints Mackinnon as the formal investigating officer for the case.
Even more incredibly, Mackinnon and Evans then together work on a new Civil Service Code which specifically makes the retrospective actioning of these complaints possible.

So Mackinnon instigated the complaints, investigated the complaints and drafted the code changes which made the complaints actionable.

She was also appointed by the Scottish government. Internal Nat witch hunt gone bad.

She was chosen from a shortlist of UK Civil Service approved candidates. Doesn't matter anyway now.. she and MacKinnon b***sed up big time. I do hope Salmond sues the Daily Record to the fullest possible extent though.