Question Time Tonight - Page 145 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Question Time Tonight


Recommended Posts

Any Questions on Radio 4 at 8pm from Inverness

Jim Fairlie MSP for SNP

Lord Forsyth for Tories - making it two unelected Lords representing the Scottish Tories in 24 hours

Patrick Harvie for the Greens and women with huge cocks

Johann Lamont for Labour who thinks we are too stupid to make decisions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Any Questions on Radio 4 at 8pm from Inverness

Jim Fairlie MSP for SNP

Lord Forsyth for Tories - making it two unelected Lords representing the Scottish Tories in 24 hours

Patrick Harvie for the Greens and women with huge cocks

Johann Lamont for Labour who thinks we are too stupid to make decisions

i like fairlie, traditional snp man

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, aaid said:

The thing with the IRA is that *all* their members were doing illegal things, they were a terrorist organisation, that’s what their whole existence was about, so the scope was so much wider.

I must’ve missed the guns and bombs part of the SNP.

There is no bombs and guns part to the SNP, clearly, but other crimes/misdemeanours are available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

nah man, I wish it were like that but unfortunately not

So tell me how it would have looked? Independence seekers pulling up Westminster for not investigating MPs and then brushing under the carpet allegations regarding Salmond that had hit the press. Money for old rope for unionists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Shouldn’t you be asking the same question to the people actually in a position to do something?

There is no plan as the only avenue open to acquiring a referendum is asking Westminster for a Section 30 and we know how that ends up. End of the matter. 

Nobody in the independence movement has a viable plan within politics or outside politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

There is no plan as the only avenue open to acquiring a referendum is asking Westminster for a Section 30 and we know how that ends up. End of the matter. 

Nobody in the independence movement has a viable plan within politics or outside politics.

If that’s the case, that’s fine, my issue is the snp using independence and the lure of a referendum to get elected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

If that’s the case, that’s fine, my issue is the snp using independence and the lure of a referendum to get elected. 

As do any independence-backing party. Some proclaim to have ideas that people rally against such as defacto referendum killing it off but there you go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It used to be the case that it was accepted that all we had to do was elect a majority of indy-supporting MPs and that was it.  The referendum route was brought in at a much later stage.  Now that that route has been closed off (and why are the SNP not appealing that decision that was always going to be made by a unionist establishment body like the English supreme court?  In fact why did they ever start down that route?), it seems to me that reverting to the original majority of MPs tactic (provided that indy is stated in the manifesto) should be considered.  Of course the yoons won't like it, but tough shit.  All they need to do to stop it is get a majority of yoon MPs in Scotland.  Why do we always need to avoid infuriating WM?

I have no faith in Yousaf doing anything to try to get us our independence back.  He'll procrastinate just like NS did from 2017 onwards.

Edited by Alibi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alibi said:

Now that that route has been closed off (and why are the SNP not appealing that decision that was always going to be made by a unionist establishment body like the English supreme court?  

Who would be the appropriate body to appeal to?

I’ll save you the bother, the UKSC is the final body, there is no appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alibi said:

It used to be the case that it was accepted that all we had to do was elect a majority of indy-supporting MPs and that was it.  The referendum route was brought in at a much later stage.  Now that that route has been closed off (and why are the SNP not appealing that decision that was always going to be made by a unionist establishment body like the English supreme court?  In fact why did they ever start down that route?), it seems to me that reverting to the original majority of MPs tactic (provided that indy is stated in the manifesto) should be considered.  Of course the yoons won't like it, but tough shit.  All they need to do to stop it is get a majority of yoon MPs in Scotland.  Why do we always need to avoid infuriating WM?

I have no faith in Yousaf doing anything to try to get us our independence back.  He'll procrastinate just like NS did from 2017 onwards.

The fact is they'll keep moving the goalposts to suit their agenda as they did with the 40% threshold in 1979 and as they have ever since. We need to stop pishing about with an aggressive master/colonial state and take this to international courts. 
To tell us there is no legal route to independence is in itself against the law, at the very least we can force their hand on that IF we present it properly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, aaid said:

Who would be the appropriate body to appeal to?

I’ll save you the bother, the UKSC is the final body, there is no appeal.

Would the ICJ not take a position on this? UN Resolution 1514XV & Millenium Declaration Res 55/2 would apply surely?

Edited by Bzzzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, aaid said:

Who would be the appropriate body to appeal to?

I’ll save you the bother, the UKSC is the final body, there is no appeal.

I'm not a lawyer, but is there not a process whereby a biased court (which is how I regard the SC on this matter at least) can be over-ruled at a higher, international level?  The UN for example.  If there is no democratic means, what are we expected to do?  NS has really fucked things up over the last 6 years.  Instead of holding a closed shop "convention", which will lead to nothing, they should be putting indy front and centre at every opportunity.  I'm not interested in this vague "building support for indy" shite.  Support grows when there is campaigning for indy; it doesn't grow when the whole thing is put on ice.  As for Flynn's statement about getting more powers from a Labour government, if those were his actual words, I hope his Dundee United get relegated, and relegated again the next 3 seasons after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bzzzz said:

Would the ICJ not take a position on this? UN Resolution 1514XV & Millenium Declaration Res 55/2 would apply surely?

Another “I’m not a lawyer” post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Bzzzz said:

Who isn't? you or me? 

If you were a lawyer then you would know that the specific UN resolution that you are referring to is to do with countries that have been colonised.   The problem being that Scotland entered into a voluntary Union and was not colonised and it would be next to impossible to state a case otherwise.

 

Edited by aaid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

The only court we can go to now is the court of public opinion

The highest in the land

It may require progressive voices in England and from abroad to pitch in.  Alongside an obvious (not 50 plus 1) majority.

It took 18 years from the gerrymandered 1979 devolution vote, until the 1997 Yes vote.

That's the timeline i think we now face for Indyref2 (i.e. an actual generation).

My only question is whether the SNP now need to spend a period of time out of power, only to sweep back and force indyref2.

 

What i am sure of is that Nicola Sturgeon was given a good hand post-brexit, and failed utterly to move things forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, aaid said:

 The problem being that Scotland entered into a voluntary Union and was not colonised

 

Could this not be challenged tho aaid? It was hardly a democratic decision. The western world have went to war in the name of 'democracy' in recent years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Och Aye said:

Could this not be challenged tho aaid? It was hardly a democratic decision. The western world have went to war in the name of 'democracy' in recent years.

I think you would struggle tbf.- at the same time you have another group of people trying to assert the legitimacy of the Claim of Right as some sort of ancient legal get out of jail free.  The Claim of Right which was a precursor to the Union.

That the majority of the population of Scotland did not materially benefit from the Union is probably a good point, I'd suggest that equally applies to the majority of the population of the UK though.  That is a class rather than a colonial issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Och Aye said:

Could this not be challenged tho aaid? It was hardly a democratic decision. The western world have went to war in the name of 'democracy' in recent years.

I was about to say the same . ‘Voluntary’ is highly debatable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TDYER63 said:

I was about to say the same . ‘Voluntary’ is highly debatable. 

It was voluntary and legal based upon the constitution of Scotland that was in place before the Union.

Legally that's the crucial point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, aaid said:

It was voluntary and legal based upon the constitution of Scotland that was in place before the Union.

Legally that's the crucial point.

I suppose its legal in the same way that a company starves a competitor of business then embarks on a hostile takeover when they are at their lowest . Legal , but certainly not voluntary . 
A handful of folk can take the entire country into a Union but when 50% of the  entire country want out its not legal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Dave78 said:

What i am sure of is that Nicola Sturgeon was given a good hand post-brexit, and failed utterly to move things forward.

Nonsense.

As I have pointed out multiple rimes there is no way 'to move things forward'. The only route is through a Section 30 which was asked for multiple times and replied with multiple no's. She took it to court and got a no. She put across defacto referendum and was not to the liking of too many..

Nobody, political or otherwise has a way to make Scottish independence barring revolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...