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

A_Medium_Size_Jock

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

!!!!ing indy supporters.. You really do take the !!!! with these imaginary ideas.

Indeed so, they do.

Not just imaginary ideas, though that is bad enough: within the last few pages of this thread we have also seen that these indy supporters cannot read (well, only the bits they CHOOSE to read); cannot do basic arithmetic (again unless the end figure meets THEIR agenda); and actively deny fact as being fact!
Incredible really, isn't it?
On a positive note, it is absolute carp like this that encourages more and more Scots to wise up and realise just what a bunch of idealistic dreamers the SNP really are.

Shakethedisease

Moto2 wrote: »

More waffle and bluster .... it doesn't matter whether or not you think it'll be turned down and the reasons for it

You wrote...


So what you've said is Sturgeon is going to come up with a plan she hopes will be turned down by May?

You later said that was so she could goad her political opponents

Do you still think Sturgeon hopes her plan to keep Scotland in the EU is turned down by May et al?

Feel free to answer either yes or no

I'll answer how I like thank you very much. Waffle and bluster for you, is for me explaining as clearly as possible what's going on for those ( other than you who read the thread ) who may not have a full grasp or any experience of Scottish politics. Nor understanding of pro-indy perspectives.

Pretty much everyone knows that the only way for Scotland to stay in the EU or the Single market IF the UK is not, is independence. The only way for Sturgeon to actually prove it beyond doubt is to come up with even vaguely feasible and credible plans based something similar to a Denmark/Greenland scenario and lay them out to Westminster.

A refusal proves beyond doubt to all Scottish voters that there are no options left other than 1) independence or 2) Leaving the EU/Single market. Scottish Labour who are already on the brink of internal war over this, and the Scottish Lib Dems ( who are massive EU and single market advocates in the rest of the UK ) will finally and painfully be faced with this choice also. The SNP will have Theresa May to thank for that.

This is all dependent on a Hard Brexit which is by no means sure. What will be sure however, is any Holyrood response to it should it happen and all other options are gone. :cool:

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Rubbish, don't take some lay twisted interpretation. Look at the list of reserved and devolved powers for yourself. Holyrood would be in charge of fishing and agriculture but not trade.

You can control quotas and other issues but not trade, Holyrood has never and hopefully will never be in any control over trade. Therefore your lecturer is talking rubbish. You know it, I know it and everyone else knows it. He's probably a member of a few too many caf!s in Holland if he thinks Holyrood controls trade when we leave the EU.

Human rights? What are you on about now, that's separate from the EU anyway and it hasn't happened.

!!!!ing indy supporters.. You really do take the !!!! with these imaginary ideas.

I see an SNP MP ( Tasmina Sheikh ) asked Leadsom today in parliament outright if Fishing and Agriculture are to be devolved automatically. No answer bar the usual 'we've been clear, what's best for the Uk' etc etc. Fishing quotas are quite the bargaining chip aren't they in Brexit talks. These would be under Holyrood control once we leave the EU.

There should be no question of them coming back to Holyrood if we leave the EU. But it seems there is for some strange reason.

Scotland 'will get more fishing powers if UK leaves EU'

The fishing minister was in Peterhead on the campaign trail despite his government backing remain.

http://stv.tv/news/politics/1348819-uk-minister-claims-scotland-will-get-more-powers-if-uk-leaves-eu/

Scotland would get "major" new powers and a bigger budget if the UK votes to leave the European Union, according to one of the campaigners backing Brexit.Tom Harris, who is heading the Scottish Vote Leave campaign, said the new powers were part of a specific Scottish case for leaving the EU.
The former Labour MP said fishing and agriculture would be left in the hands of Holyrood if the UK voted to quit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35965518

Holyrood could get new powers to control Scottish immigration if UK leaves EU, says Michael Gove

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14553330.Holyrood_could_get_new_powers_to_control_Scottish_immigration_if_UK_leaves_EU__says_Michael_Gove/

The Tories want rid of ECHR and Human rights and to replace them with a British version. They also want to impose the Great Repeal Bill.

I have no idea why you're swearing and name calling. If you don't want to read answers you don't like then don't post on the thread. No need to get your union jack knickers in a twist about it.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I see an SNP MP ( Tasmina Sheikh ) asked Leadsom today in parliament outright if Fishing and Agriculture are to be devolved automatically. No answer bar the usual 'we've been clear, what's best for the Uk' etc etc. Fishing quotas are quite the bargaining chip aren't they in Brexit talks. These would be under Holyrood control once we leave the EU.

There should be no question of them coming back to Holyrood if we leave the EU. But it seems there is for some strange reason.

http://stv.tv/news/politics/1348819-uk-minister-claims-scotland-will-get-more-powers-if-uk-leaves-eu/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35965518http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14553330.Holyrood_could_get_new_powers_to_control_Scottish_immigration_if_UK_leaves_EU__says_Michael_Gove/

The Tories want rid of ECHR and Human rights and to replace them with a British version. They also want to impose the Great Repeal Bill.

I have no idea why you're swearing and name calling. If you don't want to read answers you don't like then don't post on the thread. No need to get your union jack knickers in a twist about it.

I get frustrated because nowhere has it been said that human rights will be repealed and not replaced and neither has it been said that powers will not be returned to Holyrood from the EU where it's clearly a devolved matter. You just make stuff up. And so do your compatriots. It really is exacerbating and exhausting.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I get frustrated because nowhere has it been said that human rights will be repealed and not replaced and neither has it been said that powers will not be returned to Holyrood from the EU where it's clearly a devolved matter. You just make stuff up. And so do your compatriots. It really is exacerbating and exhausting.

I don't make stuff up. If you think I have then provide evidence of it as just cos you say it don't make it so. I always provide links either as backup or to provoke further discussion or counterpoints as issues arise, and if it's my own opinion I'll generally say so.

You probably just don't like the answers nor the fact I just keep going answering posts regardless. You certainly won't be the first or the last on these threads to feel that way I can assure you of that.

Here, why not calm down and read some of this regarding that GERS paper a few pages back. The parts on pensions or debt allocations post independence should have you reaching for a calming strong alcoholic drink after you perusal... or maybe 4 or 5 ?

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2016/11/24/beyond-gers-a-response-to-comments/

That same commentator also suggested that, rather than a blanket ban on extra-rUK payments, the blockade could be limited solely to Scotland. I find it extremely difficult to suggest a way in which that this could be done which wouldn’t be seen as a blatantly discriminatory attack on pensioners based solely on place of residence. “You can have your pension paid to you anywhere on the planet*”
*except Scotland

Or this one in direct response to Hague and Lovatt.

https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/9917/robin-mcalpine-evidence-one-trick-unionism-simply-isnt-evolving

So as always we welcome that debate. It would just be nice if it was grounded in something a little more serious than the two blogs on which the whole unionist community seems to have relied for their response.

The two blogs in question are here and here. Craig has addressed the multiple mistakes in them here, but I want to outline a few examples.

Enjoy !

elantan

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I get frustrated because nowhere has it been said that human rights will be repealed and not replaced and neither has it been said that powers will not be returned to Holyrood from the EU where it's clearly a devolved matter. You just make stuff up. And so do your compatriots. It really is exacerbating and exhausting.

Don't stress we find your posts exacerbating and exhausting as well ... at least we will have some say in what happens to our country though ... you just get to bleat and make noise but won't get a say .. and yet it really really intrigues you ... so your kinda bringing it on yourself in a way

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I don't make stuff up. If you think I have then provide evidence of it as just cos you say it don't make it so. I always provide links either as backup or to provoke further discussion or counterpoints as issues arise, and if it's my own opinion I'll generally say so.

You probably just don't like the answers nor the fact I just keep going answering posts regardless. You certainly won't be the first or the last on these threads to feel that way I can assure you of that.

Here, why not calm down and read some of this regarding that GERS paper a few pages back. The parts on pensions or debt allocations post independence should have you reaching for a calming strong alcoholic drink after you perusal... or maybe 4 or 5 ?

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2016/11/24/beyond-gers-a-response-to-comments/

Or this one in direct response to Hague and Lovatt.

https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/9917/robin-mcalpine-evidence-one-trick-unionism-simply-isnt-evolvingEnjoy !

You said powers will be removed from Scotland by Westminster.

Show me where that is true. Not someone suggesting they believe it will happen, but someone saying it will, from an authority capable of doing so, like the UK government.

You said that human rights will be repealed, show me a policy from the UK government that says they will reduce people's rights if they were to replace human rights with a bill of rights.

I called it balls, and we've had about 5 posts from you since trying to convince people you and your lecturer / journo friends are correct.

What am I wrong about?

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I don't make stuff up.

I have already shown otherwise.:rotfl:

TrickyTree83

elantan wrote: »

Don't stress we find your posts exacerbating and exhausting as well ... at least we will have some say in what happens to our country though ... you just get to bleat and make noise but won't get a say .. and yet it really really intrigues you ... so your kinda bringing it on yourself in a way

It's a topic that interests me and one that also affects me.

So if I see BS I'm going to counter the BS. It serves a good purpose, as if there's any neutrals reading the thread who do have a vote they'll see how ridiculous the pro-independence support actually is. How hollow and baseless the arguments are. Refusing to answer when cornered, deflecting, pivoting, ignoring truth, taking media opinion and hearsay as fact.

sss555s

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

It's a topic that interests me and one that also affects me.

So if I see BS I'm going to counter the BS. It serves a good purpose, as if there's any neutrals reading the thread who do have a vote they'll see how ridiculous the pro-independence support actually is. How hollow and baseless the arguments are. Refusing to answer when cornered, deflecting, pivoting, ignoring truth, taking media opinion and hearsay as fact.

You have questioned Shakes post which she had backed up with links.

All I see is you babbling on and calling it BS. Where is your counter information for the neutrals to read?

And since when was the UK government a reliable source?