FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Parker Bowles/Scottish Independence2
Parker Bowles/Scottish Independence2
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" As you clearly aren't a History graduate, I don't quite see why you think you know what a History graduate is or isn't likely to know. But if you are an expert on the monarchy, I look forward to reading your dissertation concerning the House of Cerdic and the House of Godwin and why it is that the present monarch claims to have blood from both royal houses in her. " why do I need to prove anything to you, I am not the one shouting out how qualified I am in this.. its your modern history and politics that I am picking fault with. And if I wanted to write a dissertation it would currently be about continental shift and magnetic poles shift.. The Royals family tree is out there for any to look at.. and actually as I am from an area that is rife in history to do with the Magna Carta and coming from a family that is very into their royals, actually it wouldnt take me to long to write something on that.. and lets face it.. anyone can do the research with google. My point to you was that you shout out about one thing.. then try to undermine those that disagree with you.. I am happy to have a discussion about why I think the royals are good for this country.. Why I think that the UK needs to stay as one united Country and why I think that many men and women that fought and died for this country would be turning in their graves at how this country is going now. I think should it go to the vote that Scotland will not get its independence.. and I really believe that if it went to the vote on keeping or losing the monarchy that they would stay. For me while we still have a monarchy, I find it disrespectful for people to bad mouth them.. Not want to have them is someone's right.. however I was brought up to respect my elders and to respect and be loyal to my Queen. Just because I respect our monarchy it does not make me any less of a person than those that do not.. Cali | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I was last post on the old one so I thought I'd continue a fun thread! Just for the record, my claim to fame on this subject is being possibly the only man to be censored by the BBC on a forum for merely pointing out that in some countries, far from rewarding a person for having an affair while married, by making her Queen, they are stoned to death. Which is true, some countries do believe it to be an appropriate punishment for adultery. I wasn't advocating it for Camilla. however the monitors thought it not permissible for their forum. concerning Scottish independence, nobody has answered my question, what percentage of the national debt should Scotland take with it; half or a third?
"Regarding your question of national debt! There are more people living in the greater london area alone than there are in the whole of scotland! We can pay per head so to speak! Il send my 50p down by postal order!!  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I was last post on the old one so I thought I'd continue a fun thread! Just for the record, my claim to fame on this subject is being possibly the only man to be censored by the BBC on a forum for merely pointing out that in some countries, far from rewarding a person for having an affair while married, by making her Queen, they are stoned to death. Which is true, some countries do believe it to be an appropriate punishment for adultery. I wasn't advocating it for Camilla. however the monitors thought it not permissible for their forum. concerning Scottish independence, nobody has answered my question, what percentage of the national debt should Scotland take with it; half or a third?
Regarding your question of national debt! There are more people living in the greater london area alone than there are in the whole of scotland! We can pay per head so to speak! Il send my 50p down by postal order!! "
More like, 50,000.00
I'll send you my account number.
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I've nothing against any of the individuals who perform the function they're asked. I just don't like the concept nor the principle of hereditary privelege, nor the idea that any citizen is a subject , especially of someone who is above the law of the land. Thankfully, I can call myself a citizen of the EU. I can't in the UK. Remove the people occupying the positions, look objectively at it and tell me it aint a rotten throwback to days long gone. " I can't think of anything worse than being 'a citizen of the EU' just out of curiosity, what has being a subject, cost you recently? What have you done that you wouldn't have done given a 'choice'? .as a subject of the queen you are free to leave if you wish or stay at your choice. And lastly I like the traditions that have grown up over centuries.
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" I can't think of anything worse than being 'a citizen of the EU' just out of curiosity, what has being a subject, cost you recently? What have you done that you wouldn't have done given a 'choice'? .as a subject of the queen you are free to leave if you wish or stay at your choice. And lastly I like the traditions that have grown up over centuries.
"I did say I objected to the principle. I've never stood for parliament, for example, but I wouldn't be allowed to sit in one unless I took an oath of loyalty as a subject of the head of state. Citizenship gives me rights and equality enshrined in law, a law that isn't subject to the theoretical whim of a hereditary ruler. As I say, I've nothing against any of them individually. I'm sure they do a good job of what they are asked today. I just think, as a country, it's time to move. Let them keep their personal wealth and live their life of aristocracy. It's their position as head of state I object to. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Let them keep their personal wealth and live their life of aristocracy. It's their position as head of state I object to." It's a ceremonial and symbolic position more than anything else. The Queen's Speech requires approval of the Prime Minister and if the ruling monarch ever refused to dissolve a govt when required to do so he/she would very quickly find that the govt would dipose her/him. The monarch is NOT above the law of the land, but in reality the Queen would never be had up on a misdemeanour charge. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" I can't think of anything worse than being 'a citizen of the EU' just out of curiosity, what has being a subject, cost you recently? What have you done that you wouldn't have done given a 'choice'? .as a subject of the queen you are free to leave if you wish or stay at your choice. And lastly I like the traditions that have grown up over centuries.
I did say I objected to the principle.
I've never stood for parliament, for example, but I wouldn't be allowed to sit in one unless I took an oath of loyalty as a subject of the head of state.
Citizenship gives me rights and equality enshrined in law, a law that isn't subject to the theoretical whim of a hereditary ruler.
As I say, I've nothing against any of them individually. I'm sure they do a good job of what they are asked today. I just think, as a country, it's time to move.
Let them keep their personal wealth and live their life of aristocracy. It's their position as head of state I object to."So you want a president who meddle in politics!!!!!!! I think that should be in caputals! Good god no, not another politician, we've got a head of state the ONLY signs the acts of parliament and nothing else and no she doesn't have any theoretical rights to send you to the tower, not unless she wants to start a coup! That's just a little unlikely.
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I've nothing against any of the individuals who perform the function they're asked. I just don't like the concept nor the principle of hereditary privelege, nor the idea that any citizen is a subject , especially of someone who is above the law of the land. Thankfully, I can call myself a citizen of the EU. I can't in the UK. Remove the people occupying the positions, look objectively at it and tell me it aint a rotten throwback to days long gone. " so, let me get this correct. you object to someone born into priviledge yet you are happy to be a subject of an unelected body that is hell bent on controlling every aspect of your life? interesting | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"President Salmond.....has a bit of a ring to it dontcha think?" sounds a bit fishy to me | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
In reality it is the Prime Minister and his/her Cabinet that have taken over the Royal Prerogative exclusively with the exeption of matters concerning the Royal Family. The PM and Cabinet are answerable to Parliament, so for all intents and purposes there is very little practical difference between the UK and a Nation with an elected head of state - apart from the obvious point that is! In reality any elected Head of State would again be drawn from the social/economic elite so what would we gain practically?
I am not a Monarchist and hold no brief for the House of Saxe-Coburg-Und-Gotha but i think we have more pressing matters to contend with. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"President Salmond.....has a bit of a ring to it dontcha think?" I bet he doodles that over and over again on the cover of his copy of 'Presidents for Dummies' book. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I've just been reading up on when the vote for independence will be and it looks like it's going to be August 2014. However, I have a problem with the question/s that is/are going to be asked. If it's a straight Yes or No to full Independence from the UK then only Scots should vote, but if the 'third question' that Alex Salmond is being open-minded about - the so-called 'Devo'Max' option - should voters opt for 'No' to full independence, then everyone in the UK should vote as Devo-Max means that Scotland will get full control of itself and it's finances apart from VAT, N.I. and Pensions, which will still be controlled by Westminster. I don't see how a Devo-Max option can exclude the rest of the UK from voting on it when it affects the rest of the UK." I'll vote.....YES....how many votes can I cast?  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I'll vote.....YES....how many votes can I cast? "One. And you've cast it. Now shut up and get back to the kitchen wench.  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" As you clearly aren't a History graduate, I don't quite see why you think you know what a History graduate is or isn't likely to know. But if you are an expert on the monarchy, I look forward to reading your dissertation concerning the House of Cerdic and the House of Godwin and why it is that the present monarch claims to have blood from both royal houses in her. why do I need to prove anything to you, I am not the one shouting out how qualified I am in this.. its your modern history and politics that I am picking fault with. And if I wanted to write a dissertation it would currently be about continental shift and magnetic poles shift.. The Royals family tree is out there for any to look at.. and actually as I am from an area that is rife in history to do with the Magna Carta and coming from a family that is very into their royals, actually it wouldnt take me to long to write something on that.. and lets face it.. anyone can do the research with google. My point to you was that you shout out about one thing.. then try to undermine those that disagree with you.. I am happy to have a discussion about why I think the royals are good for this country.. Why I think that the UK needs to stay as one united Country and why I think that many men and women that fought and died for this country would be turning in their graves at how this country is going now. I think should it go to the vote that Scotland will not get its independence.. and I really believe that if it went to the vote on keeping or losing the monarchy that they would stay. For me while we still have a monarchy, I find it disrespectful for people to bad mouth them.. Not want to have them is someone's right.. however I was brought up to respect my elders and to respect and be loyal to my Queen. Just because I respect our monarchy it does not make me any less of a person than those that do not.. Cali " The fact that you think research for a dissertation in History can be done using an internet search engine makes it transparently clear that you have not studied the subject beyond A Levels. Historical research is done using primary sources which are documents contemporary, or near contemporary with the period under study. For the Anglo-Saxon period for example we would use chronicles, , charters, hagiographies manumissions and the like, whilst for the British Raj we would use government and and military documents, company records, the private correspondence of Raj figures such as Lord Curzon etc etc. The vast majority of these documents are housed in the British Library and cannot be seen by members of the general public. You are not an Historian and to adduce the fact that you live in the area where the Magna Carta was signed as grounds for asserting that you know something about History is as ludicrous as it would be for me to assert that I know something about zoology because there are slugs and snails on my allotment. With regard to politics, I very much doubt that you know much about this subject either.Have you read Mill, or Hobbes, Rocco, Bakunin, or Burke? Do you know which Prime Minister was behind 'The Housing of the Working Classes Act" was or when this act was passed? Do you know what the Fabian Society is, or the Freedom Association is? Do you know who the Bildeburg Group are, or what the Second International is? Can you define 'libertarianism" 'neo-liberalism' or "One Nation Conservatism? Almost certainly not. In my opinion ignorance is bad but arrogance borne of ignorance is worse.As for childish huffs because someone has come along who obviously knows more than you do are contemptible. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Have you read Mill, or Hobbes, Rocco, Bakunin, or Burke? " No.....but Stephen King and Jackie Collins have penned some great stuff! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"scotlands % of the debt is absolutly nothing , we were ruled by london for over 300 years , they called the shots , they buggered up and saddled all the subject countrys with debt , or would like to if we let them . When you are in charge and make an arse of it , you carry the can , not the people you are forcing your decisions on lol, have a nice time paying it off , if you get into difficulty , well , send us a postcard "August 2014. Let's just wait and see eh. Do you promise to not get arsey if it doesn't go your way? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" The fact that you think research for a dissertation in History can be done using an internet search engine makes it transparently clear that you have not studied the subject beyond A Levels. Historical research is done using primary sources which are documents contemporary, or near contemporary with the period under study. For the Anglo-Saxon period for example we would use chronicles, , charters, hagiographies manumissions and the like, whilst for the British Raj we would use government and and military documents, company records, the private correspondence of Raj figures such as Lord Curzon etc etc. The vast majority of these documents are housed in the British Library and cannot be seen by members of the general public. You are not an Historian and to adduce the fact that you live in the area where the Magna Carta was signed as grounds for asserting that you know something about History is as ludicrous as it would be for me to assert that I know something about zoology because there are slugs and snails on my allotment. With regard to politics, I very much doubt that you know much about this subject either.Have you read Mill, or Hobbes, Rocco, Bakunin, or Burke? Do you know which Prime Minister was behind 'The Housing of the Working Classes Act" was or when this act was passed? Do you know what the Fabian Society is, or the Freedom Association is? Do you know who the Bildeburg Group are, or what the Second International is? Can you define 'libertarianism" 'neo-liberalism' or "One Nation Conservatism? Almost certainly not. In my opinion ignorance is bad but arrogance borne of ignorance is worse.As for childish huffs because someone has come along who obviously knows more than you do are contemptible. " Sigh.. really if you put half as much effort into reading about the monarchy as you do trying to pick apart my posts you would read that I said.. YOU COULD GOOGLE it.. and actually its a bone of contention of mine that most degrees now are done without a pupil ever picking up a book as everything has been scanned and is available in some form on line.. And I feel that in that way people are losing the ability to research. As to my level of history, having a ph d does not make you an expert.. And someone can easily know more without holding a single qualification. As someone who has vast amounts of academic experience and who has often been thrown out of some obscure little libraries. I would like to point out its not me huffing about things.. and I have never said you dont know more about some things in history than me.. I am sure you do.. I don't have the need to try and shove how qualified I am down peoples throat as to be honest people appreciate my views. But the fact is my point was true.. anyone can research things with google these days.. there are research papers, scans of old books.. you name it.. Personally I think that you can not face that someone doesnt bow down to your perceived intellectual superiority.. but wait.. no that must be poor little me talking with my inferiority complex again. Instead of again trying to make yourself look big and me small.. go do some of this research and see how much the royal family is still appreciated and involved in this country. oh and btw, all of what you put for me to go read comes up in one or two google entries.. So who is googling stuff to put on now.. I have not once tried to suggest that you don't know stuff.. just that some of your facts are rather off..
Cali | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" With regard to politics, I very much doubt that you know much about this subject either. Almost certainly not. " And I actually hold a degree in politics.. So but I just do not have any wish to spout on a public forum and ram it down peoples throats...
Cali | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It never ceases to amaze me that some people, who are British, seem to actually hate the country that bore them, nurtured them, educated them, and allows them to speak freely regarding whatever it is they feel passionately about, yet they still remain here. Maybe they stay because they know if they went to another country and started criticising them (leopards & spots) they would be very quickly told where the exit is. Not such a bad place, this Britain, after all. "My point exactly, in my post above, "as a subject of the queen you are free to leave if you wish or stay at your choice. And lastly I like the traditions that have grown up over centuries." Why on earth would anybody want to replace our monarch, who makes a profit, with an elected political head, who is never going to be a council house tenant from a Manchester housing estate, who will undoubtedly, have an entourage, the size of a large government department and the bill to go with it. In the process throwing out centuries of history and tradition. To be replace with something new that lacks any real meaning just because it might be thought to be a modern idea. Never mind god save the Queen, god save me!
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" so, let me get this correct. you object to someone born into priviledge yet you are happy to be a subject of an unelected body that is hell bent on controlling every aspect of your life? interesting" eh? you'll need to elaborate | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It never ceases to amaze me that some people, who are British, seem to actually hate the country that bore them, nurtured them, educated them, and allows them to speak freely regarding whatever it is they feel passionately about, yet they still remain here. Maybe they stay because they know if they went to another country and started criticising them (leopards & spots) they would be very quickly told where the exit is. Not such a bad place, this Britain, after all.
My point exactly, in my post above, "as a subject of the queen you are free to leave if you wish or stay at your choice. And lastly I like the traditions that have grown up over centuries."
Why on earth would anybody want to replace our monarch, who makes a profit, with an elected political head, who is never going to be a council house tenant from a Manchester housing estate, who will undoubtedly, have an entourage, the size of a large government department and the bill to go with it.
In the process throwing out centuries of history and tradition. To be replace with something new that lacks any real meaning just because it might be thought to be a modern idea.
Never mind god save the Queen, god save me!
"And then there are Republics like America, who decided back in 1700-whatever that they didn't want to cow-tow to a bunch of toffs, who absolutely love our Pomp & Circumstance occasions like Royal Weddings etc and envy our 1,000 year monarchy and all the traditions that go with it. then there's Italy, that well known and probably the very first Republic who had as it's head until very recently... Silvio Berlusconi. Says it all really dunnit. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
didnt think this lot you have at the moment have been freeloading for 1000 years , thought you got them at a discounted price from the germans just a couple of hundred years ago . read on an earlier post how the country of britian has nurtured us , allways brings a smile to my face looking at the slums we have , the poverty , deprivation , the ever increasing price of an education , the totaly emptied fishing grounds , the illigal wars the southern governments are so eager to get involved in , especially when they are told to by the yankies with this sort of nurturing then several worshipful dieties wont save us . Not even all the protestant dieties , the catholic one , most of the old celtic and norse ones , a couple of the old world greek and the south american gods . methinks with the southern government having our best interests at heart lol then we are doomed . Just a thought, when cammila gets to be the english queen it just goes to show that you can shag your way into a nice wee job . I bet old man bowles will get a wee bung for being a nice quite cuck | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"The Queen is defiantly descended from the house Cerdic( known as the Cerdician bloodline) Not sure about the house of Godwin though(King Harolds family) they weren't Royal blood.He took on the role of King because he, and many of the saxon earls felt they had very little choice as their way of life was threatened by edwards naming a Norman,William as his heir. As i said in my post on the other thread.The Queen is directly descended from William, and through his Wife, Alfred the Great and the Cerdician line as well" Cant recall a blood relationship to the house of Godwin, (Id have to check up,) but they were related by marriage in that Tostig Godwinson and William 1st both married daughters of Baldwin of Flanders | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
. i hope the south has a happy time trying to pay te thing off | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It never ceases to amaze me that some people, who are British, seem to actually hate the country that bore them, nurtured them, educated them, and allows them to speak freely regarding whatever it is they feel passionately about, yet they still remain here. Maybe they stay because they know if they went to another country and started criticising them (leopards & spots) they would be very quickly told where the exit is. Not such a bad place, this Britain, after all.
My point exactly, in my post above, "as a subject of the queen you are free to leave if you wish or stay at your choice. And lastly I like the traditions that have grown up over centuries."
Why on earth would anybody want to replace our monarch, who makes a profit, with an elected political head, who is never going to be a council house tenant from a Manchester housing estate, who will undoubtedly, have an entourage, the size of a large government department and the bill to go with it.
In the process throwing out centuries of history and tradition. To be replace with something new that lacks any real meaning just because it might be thought to be a modern idea.
Never mind god save the Queen, god save me!
And then there are Republics like America, who decided back in 1700-whatever that they didn't want to cow-tow to a bunch of toffs, who absolutely love our Pomp & Circumstance occasions like Royal Weddings etc and envy our 1,000 year monarchy and all the traditions that go with it.
then there's Italy, that well known and probably the very first Republic who had as it's head until very recently... Silvio Berlusconi. Says it all really dunnit. "Im sure we could all name exhaustive lists of dodgey leaders of whatever political system, or name particular countries as singular evidence that systems dont work. This in itself doesnt prove that much, The point is to strive fro the best and most democratic of systems,And most people do think that our political system is in crises so its worth assessing what is wrong, with nothing including the monarchy being sacrosanct and ut of the debate. and furthermore the monarchy is hardly an ideal system when someone can get rights from birth that endorse acts of genocide (such as the displacement of a whole population in diego garcia via the queens perogative and being left stteless in poverty and malnutrition) and like it or not dodgey as Blair and Camoran may be at least they are democraticlly accountable and can be elected out. Incidentally the irish system has a HOS that interferes less in politics has less powers, costs less, hasnt lost thier heritage (if anything it has re established it) and yet apart from that thier system of governembt isnt massively different from our own, So yes the logic of having the monarchy should be questioned as should all political systems thats the point of democratic debate it should constntly strive to evolve and imrove for the betterment of its peoples. And this is not treason as someone has suggested treason is acts such as when william 1 broke his oath of alegiance to the king of france and fought wars against him. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"We're DOOMED! we're Doomed! How do you type a Scottish accent?
"dinna nae | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
It won't stop me sticking up for Wales or Scotland in any sport thats going on though | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
and when you get your own country , we might even support some of your teams | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Oh shut up and show us your kilt , I support kilts too "is that support as in like (up with the kilts) or as in lifting, either way it has an interesting double meaning | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"i cant think of anything worse than being subjected to 1000 years of english royalist trasdition didnt think this lot you have at the moment have been freeloading for 1000 years , thought you got them at a discounted price from the germans just a couple of hundred years ago . read on an earlier post how the country of britian has nurtured us , allways brings a smile to my face looking at the slums we have , the poverty , deprivation , the ever increasing price of an education , the totaly emptied fishing grounds , the illigal wars the southern governments are so eager to get involved in , especially when they are told to by the yankies with this sort of nurturing then several worshipful dieties wont save us . Not even all the protestant dieties , the catholic one , most of the old celtic and norse ones , a couple of the old world greek and the south american gods . methinks with the southern government having our best interests at heart lol then we are doomed . Just a thought, when cammila gets to be the english queen it just goes to show that you can shag your way into a nice wee job . I bet old man bowles will get a wee bung for being a nice quite cuck "This post is a perfect example of someone who doesn't have an iota of what he's talking about. It started off with a mention of a 1,000 year old monarchy, moved quickly to slums and deprivation (with no substance to show hoe, where, why etc), then stupefyingly moved onto wars fought ... whenever.. then fishing grounds, the Americans, dieties, norse ones???, then onto Antiquity, and bizzarely came the inclusion of South American dieties, he then threw a Camilla in to keep it topical, and finished in a flurry about cuckolding. Wow. Impressive.  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Oh shut up and show us your kilt , I support kilts too
is that support as in like (up with the kilts) or as in lifting, either way it has an interesting double meaning
" Actually, both are good , like and lift. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Oh shut up and show us your kilt , I support kilts too
is that support as in like (up with the kilts) or as in lifting, either way it has an interesting double meaning
Actually, both are good , like and lift. "You'll be getting out ya video of Carry on Up the Khaiber next! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"hell everybody who is actually scots and wants freedom should get the vote" Only those who want independence should vote? That's a bit of a one-sided ballot innit? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Oh shut up and show us your kilt , I support kilts too
is that support as in like (up with the kilts) or as in lifting, either way it has an interesting double meaning
Actually, both are good , like and lift.
You'll be getting out ya video of Carry on Up the Khaiber next! "Already on the case | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"hell yes "Tell ya what, let's cut a deal.. Draw a straight line from Peterhead to Inverary and Scotland gets everything north of that line, and we get everything else including the islands. Deal? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
why would you want them ?surely you have enouth of your own slums , and you want ours ? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"i cant think of anything worse than being subjected to 1000 years of english royalist trasdition didnt think this lot you have at the moment have been freeloading for 1000 years , thought you got them at a discounted price from the germans just a couple of hundred years ago . read on an earlier post how the country of britian has nurtured us , allways brings a smile to my face looking at the slums we have , the poverty , deprivation , the ever increasing price of an education , the totaly emptied fishing grounds , the illigal wars the southern governments are so eager to get involved in , especially when they are told to by the yankies with this sort of nurturing then several worshipful dieties wont save us . Not even all the protestant dieties , the catholic one , most of the old celtic and norse ones , a couple of the old world greek and the south american gods . methinks with the southern government having our best interests at heart lol then we are doomed . Just a thought, when cammila gets to be the english queen it just goes to show that you can shag your way into a nice wee job . I bet old man bowles will get a wee bung for being a nice quite cuck
This post is a perfect example of someone who doesn't have an iota of what he's talking about. It started off with a mention of a 1,000 year old monarchy, moved quickly to slums and deprivation (with no substance to show hoe, where, why etc), then stupefyingly moved onto wars fought ... whenever.. then fishing grounds, the Americans, dieties, norse ones???, then onto Antiquity, and bizzarely came the inclusion of South American dieties, he then threw a Camilla in to keep it topical, and finished in a flurry about cuckolding.
Wow. Impressive. "To be fair, on the other thread people who said they did not like or want the monarchy were said to be haters of our country and our forces.... so a lot of bollox has been spouted on here. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"including the slums in the central belt ? why would you want them ?surely you have enouth of your own slums , and you want ours ? "A line has to go from and to somewhere and it's Aberdeen & Edinburgh I wanted to keep on the south side, the rest can be traded off if ya like. You can have Liverpool, that's a nice little City and you get loads of Irish visitors every year as a bonus! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
""So yes the logic of having the monarchy should be questioned as should all political systems thats the point of democratic debate it should constntly strive to evolve and imrove for the betterment of its peoples." Yes, that's what we're having, isn't it? As for the mention of treason, not sure where you get that from, not on this thread. As for the evolution if our democracy, it has been happening over the last five - six hundred years, otherwise some of the posts here might actually have a point. It IS evolving and has evolved into the system we have now. It evolved a little with the act of union, after which the 'British' went out into the World and took most of it!
Fair point I agee with most of what you say,the bit about treason came from th earlier thread that this evolved from there were plenty of accusations of treason there.anyway unfortunately in many ways our system has stagnated, hence why hardly anyone votes cos they dont feel engaged with politicians coming from the same old ruling classes (David Cameron is a desended of william 1v by the way)monarchy has become a sacrosanct entity that many refuse to debate (so much so that many dont even understnd the meaning of the word republican) meanwhile those with a vested interest in the status quo also have the resources to suppress it as an issue in the media,
To my mind what we have is a pseudo democracy highly flawed and seriously in need of re working.
" | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Oh shut up and show us your kilt , I support kilts too
is that support as in like (up with the kilts) or as in lifting, either way it has an interesting double meaning
Actually, both are good , like and lift.
You'll be getting out ya video of Carry on Up the Khaiber next! "scares of the natives tho lol | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"As a unionist i find all this unsettling to say the least . Actually being honest i getting confused the longer it drags on . My understanding of the constitution is that there are four equal countries but to me in practice it seems England rules . Yes you can make the arguments about population and geographical size but recently i have been thinking that maybe Scotland should try and make it more balanced . However having said that anyone who has ever watched first ministers questions will see its like kids arguing over sweties at times and i really dont think we are ready to be independent . our politics are very immature at times and lack any real vision and insight , seems they are for more concerned with scoring points off each other than actually running the country in an efficient and able manner . With the current administration faffing around and scoring off down south . As for should it be Scots or all the UK that gets to vote , what sticks in my mind is that english MP'S if i remember right were up in arms about Scottish MP's having a say in english affairs , now the fact is for 300 years thats exactly whats been happening english mp's voting on scottish affairs and seems to me they didnt like it when the boot was on the other foot so to speak . If it was England or Wales or NI that were voting would there be this much fuss ?? would Scots get a say ? i doubt it very much . Way i see it is you vote for your MP and they do whats right for their constiuents and Cameron could not allow this vote to happen unless he had some sort of support from the government so in my book England had its say , i think Scots over the age 18 should be the ones to vote . This non-sense of 16 year olds voting is just desperation . As far as the question goes i think its fair enough , yes no or devo max . For me its devo max as i in favour of the union but with a more balanced approach . Also i would like to see how MSP'S handle more responsibility , as right now i dont trust them to run a tap let alone a country . On matters that affect all of the UK like defence , nuclear power , energy etc etc then yes i think there should be some sort of discussion . The mmonarchy discussion is irrelevant in my opinion . Makes no difference to me , i not a royalist and dont see the point in them but if its what the majority of people want then thats what we got . i couldn't care less about the history of them , traditions and all that stuff . I do wish however Mr Salmond would hurry up and just ask the question so we can all get on with it . Looking back through the posts a bit can we try an talk like adults without making it personal ??? nothing wrong with a bit of healthy debate except when it degenerates into a slagging match . just my opinion hope i didnt offend anyone . "With respect to your point about 'all the fuss' and English MPs voting on Scottish matters and vice versa, is known as the West Lothian question. If you've ever seen a full house of commons empty when the announcement of 'Scottish Questions' is made is fantastic. It's quicker than shouting free drinks in the strangers bar! It is almost a tradition, that only Scottish mps stay in the chamber for Scottish Questions. And before devolution there wasn't really a problem, subsequent to devolution Scottish matters in the commons are much much less because most of Scotland's business is handled by the Scottish parliament. However after devolution, Scottish MPs can still and do sometimes take part in matters concerning only England, whereas English MPs can't any longer do this. So at present it is unfair, but only to the English! I hope there would be just as much fuss as you say if any of the constituent countries were thinking of leaving the United Kingdom. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I was last post on the old one so I thought I'd continue a fun thread! Just for the record, my claim to fame on this subject is being possibly the only man to be censored by the BBC on a forum for merely pointing out that in some countries, far from rewarding a person for having an affair while married, by making her Queen, they are stoned to death. Which is true, some countries do believe it to be an appropriate punishment for adultery. I wasn't advocating it for Camilla. however the monitors thought it not permissible for their forum. concerning Scottish independence, nobody has answered my question, what percentage of the national debt should Scotland take with it; half or a third?
"Per capita it would prob be about 1 twelth ie 5 million out of 60 mil (ish) tho it is complicated immensely if we break down debts for instance who owned RBS | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"The Queen is defiantly descended from the house Cerdic( known as the Cerdician bloodline) Not sure about the house of Godwin though(King Harolds family) they weren't Royal blood.He took on the role of King because he, and many of the saxon earls felt they had very little choice as their way of life was threatened by edwards naming a Norman,William as his heir. As i said in my post on the other thread.The Queen is directly descended from William, and through his Wife, Alfred the Great and the Cerdician line as well" No Historian would refer to the pre-Conquest English as 'Saxons".They called themselves 'English" and their language "English'. The queen does have blood from the House of Godwin in her, but you are correct that the House of Godwin was not a royal house. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"their are alot of folkies round the world that are less than chuffed about being governed from another country . come the result of 2014 when its more than likely that scotland will still be governed from england , do you think things could get a wee bit edgy and go the waythe other folkies have gone ? could be interesting "Not sure if I got you right on this, but are you saying that if the vote for Scottish independance ends up 50/50 we should divide the country in half (or whatever the proportion is) and let people move to the relevant part? this idea didn't work out so well last time it was tried... | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" With regard to politics, I very much doubt that you know much about this subject either. Almost certainly not. And I actually hold a degree in politics.. So but I just do not have any wish to spout on a public forum and ram it down peoples throats...
Cali "Well can I believe you on this? After all in another post you claimed you were 'highly qualified in History' and then made it clear from your ignorance of how History is studied (and even an eighteen year old History undergraduate knows what primary and secondary sources are) that you are far from being 'highly qualified in History'. Which university did you attend ? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"My tuppence worth." and for mine, lets do the vote, abide by the majority, and either way schedule another vote in 100 years and a day. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Have you read Mill, or Hobbes, Rocco, Bakunin, or Burke? No.....but Stephen King and Jackie Collins have penned some great stuff! "More fun, certainly. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Re the discussion on claims to royal ancestry I think it is worth pointing out a salient truth often ignored by those who seem to flag up their love of Britain... There is NO English monarchic line in the sense that it is the Scots royal line that sits on the throne. The English line dies with Elizabeth the First of England. From that point on it is the Scots line - and those with connections to the Scots line - who ascend to the throne (See James VI of Scotland and I of the Union). In relation to the issue of national debts and how they are to be balanced if Scotland was to become independent the simple formula would be that of the percentage basis. Scots are roughly 9% of the population so we'd take on board 9% of the national debt if that were to happen. Of course that means England - RUK will be faced with a national debt that is measured around the 1.8 trillion mark. Without the 50 years of oil and gas we still have to produce out of the Atlantic and North Sea fields. Bearing in mind it was the North Sea oil receipts that maintained the welfare state during the Thatcher era (the largest ever period of capital depreciation during an oil boom and indeed the only one ever known to have taken place) then it looks as if England outwith London may be forced back to an economy resembling Poland's. Doubt me? It was thus before the oil boom. The UK had declined to such a state. You can come in of course and make a bit of noise on that but to let you into some insight - I hold a doctorate in Economics. Also I'm not a nationalist. Just to pre-empt any usual antics when discussing these matters with little Englanders which is what appears to be the case on this thread. If you want to preserve the Union respect the Union and all within it. A bit of advice. If you want to slag off the Scots, deny the real history (see monarchy), deny the contribution Scots have made and continue to make, and indulge in Daily Mail type analysis and comments then expect the Union to dissolve and that economic position I have warned about to be realised. My tuppence worth." The present queen does have blood in her which goes back to pre-Conquest England, and that is a fact. But the vast majority of her blood is not English. Even if it was though, it wouldn't affect my republican views.I have always been opposed to monarchies on the grounds that their existence enshrines and perpetuates the idea that some people are born better than others. I am opposed to Britain having a monarchy on further grounds too.It encourages the people to hark back to what they perceive to be their glorious past rather than looking forward to the future and coming to terms with Britain's place as a small country (possibly becoming smaller after 2014) with no Empire in the modern world of the twenty first century. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"No Historian would refer to the pre-Conquest English as 'Saxons".They called themselves 'English" and their language "English'." Anglo-Saxon England refers to the period of the history of the part of Britain that ***became*** known as England, lasting from the end of Roman occupation and establishment of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in the 5th century ***until*** the Norman conquest of England in 1066 by William the Conqueror. Anglo-Saxon is a general term referring to the Germanic peoples who came to Britain during the 5th and 6th centuries, including Angles, Saxons, Frisii and Jutes. The term also refers to the language spoken at the time in Anglo-Saxon England, which is now called Old English, and to the culture of the era, which has long attracted popular and scholarly attention. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Well can I believe you on this? After all in another post you claimed you were 'highly qualified in History' and then made it clear from your ignorance of how History is studied (and even an eighteen year old History undergraduate knows what primary and secondary sources are) that you are far from being 'highly qualified in History'. Which university did you attend ?" Where I attended is actually no ones business.. and I didnt actually show any ignorance in how history is studied.. as I know full well but as usual you choose to ignore what you read and pick fault. I know how to study to a high level and any subject is the same.. so I know very well how to research. As to if you believe me.. the question is do I actually care.. Nope, not really, not going to leave sleep over it. And actually as I pointed out in another thread,having a bit of paper doesn't mean you know something. The problem with people like yourself is that you want to show the world your better than them, and actually in trying to do so you just make yourself look petty. My main qualification is in human behaviour, so your constant little replies have amused me greatly, but even I get bored because I have no wish to get into a constant.. "my dads bigger than your dad "type of situation. The fact is we only have your word on many things.. but no one has accused you of being less than you say you are. So I will not reply to you any more.. and you know your response to this message is already that predictable I could write it for you. Cali | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"My tuppence worth. and for mine, lets do the vote, abide by the majority, and either way schedule another vote in 100 years and a day." hey thats closer to my way of thinking, but it denies some the rigt to vote at all most live far less than 100years, at the very least after each monarch dies, and with the chance for others to apply, but then thats getting towards a republic, | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Re the discussion on claims to royal ancestry I think it is worth pointing out a salient truth often ignored by those who seem to flag up their love of Britain... There is NO English monarchic line in the sense that it is the Scots royal line that sits on the throne. The English line dies with Elizabeth the First of England. From that point on it is the Scots line - and those with connections to the Scots line - who ascend to the throne (See James VI of Scotland and I of the Union). In relation to the issue of national debts and how they are to be balanced if Scotland was to become independent the simple formula would be that of the percentage basis. Scots are roughly 9% of the population so we'd take on board 9% of the national debt if that were to happen. Of course that means England - RUK will be faced with a national debt that is measured around the 1.8 trillion mark. Without the 50 years of oil and gas we still have to produce out of the Atlantic and North Sea fields. Bearing in mind it was the North Sea oil receipts that maintained the welfare state during the Thatcher era (the largest ever period of capital depreciation during an oil boom and indeed the only one ever known to have taken place) then it looks as if England outwith London may be forced back to an economy resembling Poland's. Doubt me? It was thus before the oil boom. The UK had declined to such a state. You can come in of course and make a bit of noise on that but to let you into some insight - I hold a doctorate in Economics. Also I'm not a nationalist. Just to pre-empt any usual antics when discussing these matters with little Englanders which is what appears to be the case on this thread. If you want to preserve the Union respect the Union and all within it. A bit of advice. If you want to slag off the Scots, deny the real history (see monarchy), deny the contribution Scots have made and continue to make, and indulge in Daily Mail type analysis and comments then expect the Union to dissolve and that economic position I have warned about to be realised. My tuppence worth." | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"No Historian would refer to the pre-Conquest English as 'Saxons".They called themselves 'English" and their language "English'. Anglo-Saxon England refers to the period of the history of the part of Britain that ***became*** known as England, lasting from the end of Roman occupation and establishment of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in the 5th century ***until*** the Norman conquest of England in 1066 by William the Conqueror. Anglo-Saxon is a general term referring to the Germanic peoples who came to Britain during the 5th and 6th centuries, including Angles, Saxons, Frisii and Jutes. The term also refers to the language spoken at the time in Anglo-Saxon England, which is now called Old English, and to the culture of the era, which has long attracted popular and scholarly attention. " In the late 900's st Aelfeah (alfege) described the development of the english language amongst the english so by that time the English had become acknowledged as a distinct social group but yes the evolution form the individual peoples to the english was an ongoing process that lasted a while and the division of pre and post norman conquest is a conveniant marker at best, (says me who does not have a degree in history so Im there to be shot down if you like) | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" As you clearly aren't a History graduate, I don't quite see why you think you know what a History graduate is or isn't likely to know. But if you are an expert on the monarchy, I look forward to reading your dissertation concerning the House of Cerdic and the House of Godwin and why it is that the present monarch claims to have blood frboth royal houses in her why do I need to prove anything to you, I am not the one shouting out how qualified I am in this.. its your modern history and politics that I am picking fault with. And if I wanted to write a dissertation it would currently be about continental shift and magnetic poles shift.. The Royals family tree is out there for any to look at.. and actually as I am from an area that is rife in history to do with the Magna Carta and coming from a family that is very into their royals, actually it wouldnt take me to long to write something on that.. and lets face it.. anyone can do the research with google. My point to you was that you shout out about one thing.. then try to undermine those that disagree with you.. I am happy to have a discussion about why I think the royals are good for this country.. Why I think that the UK needs to stay as one united Country and why I think that many men and women that fought and died for this country would be turning in their graves at how this country is going now. I think should it go to the vote that Scotland will not get its independence.. and I really believe that if it went to the vote on keeping or losing the monarchy that they would stay. For me while we still have a monarchy, I find it disrespectful for people to bad mouth them.. Not want to have them is someone's right.. however I was brought up to respect my elders and to respect and be loyal to my Queen Just because I respect our monarchy it does not make me any less of a person than those that do not.. Cali " | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Well can I believe you on this? After all in another post you claimed you were 'highly qualified in History' and then made it clear from your ignorance of how History is studied (and even an eighteen year old History undergraduate knows what primary and secondary sources are) that you are far from being 'highly qualified in History'. Which university did you attend ? Where I attended is actually no ones business.. and I didnt actually show any ignorance in how history is studied.. as I know full well but as usual you choose to ignore what you read and pick fault. I know how to study to a high level and any subject is the same.. so I know very well how to research. As to if you believe me.. the question is do I actually care.. Nope, not really, not going to leave sleep over it. And actually as I pointed out in another thread,having a bit of paper doesn't mean you know something. The problem with people like yourself is that you want to show the world your better than them, and actually in trying to do so you just make yourself look petty. My main qualification is in human behaviour, so your constant little replies have amused me greatly, but even I get bored because I have no wish to get into a constant.. "my dads bigger than your dad "type of situation. The fact is we only have your word on many things.. but no one has accused you of being less than you say you are. So I will not reply to you any more.. and you know your response to this message is already that predictable I could write it for you. Cali " You made a stupid mistake. You told someone to 'get educated" but that someone transpired to be better educated than you. Then you told him that you were 'highly qualified' in History but unfortunately that person transpired to have a PH.D in History and as a result could tell straight away that you aren't. (And by implication you later admitted this by asserting that you have a degree in politics by the way). You made a fool of yourself. Live with it. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" so, let me get this correct. you object to someone born into priviledge yet you are happy to be a subject of an unelected body that is hell bent on controlling every aspect of your life? interesting eh? you'll need to elaborate" Just answer one question... theoretically, if Scotland succeeded in gaining Independence, how would you define your citizenship? That of the EU. or Scotland? Back to now, you are resident in the UK which makes you a citizen of this country. If you don't share that view for whatever view, and you prefer to classify yourself as a citizen of the EU, why aren't you living in mainland Europe? I'm Scottish by birth, and am proud to call myself British, as well as Scottish. As for the English as a race, I was sent down south of the Border in 1974 with a mission to "civilise the English!"
Ye Gods, if I'd known just how darn difficult that task would be, I'd have stayed up North!!! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"No Historian would refer to the pre-Conquest English as 'Saxons".They called themselves 'English" and their language "English'. Anglo-Saxon England refers to the period of the history of the part of Britain that ***became*** known as England, lasting from the end of Roman occupation and establishment of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in the 5th century ***until*** the Norman conquest of England in 1066 by William the Conqueror. Anglo-Saxon is a general term referring to the Germanic peoples who came to Britain during the 5th and 6th centuries, including Angles, Saxons, Frisii and Jutes. The term also refers to the language spoken at the time in Anglo-Saxon England, which is now called Old English, and to the culture of the era, which has long attracted popular and scholarly attention. In the late 900's st Aelfeah (alfege) described the development of the english language amongst the english so by that time the English had become acknowledged as a distinct social group but yes the evolution form the individual peoples to the english was an ongoing process that lasted a while and the division of pre and post norman conquest is a conveniant marker at best, (says me who does not have a degree in history so Im there to be shot down if you like)" Spot on fellow republican and without meaning to sound patronising and (if I do, I sincerely apologise) I am impressed that you know about the Frisian element which is vouched for by Procopius of Caesarea, place-name and linguistic evidence. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I was last post on the old one so I thought I'd continue a fun thread! Just for the record, my claim to fame on this subject is being possibly the only man to be censored by the BBC on a forum for merely pointing out that in some countries, far from rewarding a person for having an affair while married, by making her Queen, they are stoned to death. Which is true, some countries do believe it to be an appropriate punishment for adultery. I wasn't advocating it for Camilla. however the monitors thought it not permissible for their forum. concerning Scottish independence, nobody has answered my question, what percentage of the national debt should Scotland take with it; half or a third?
Regarding your question of national debt! There are more people living in the greater london area alone than there are in the whole of scotland! We can pay per head so to speak! Il send my 50p down by postal order!!
More like, 50,000.00
I'll send you my account number.
"You clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about so do some research instead of believing what the papers say or wherever else you are getting your misinformation. London is by a long way the most heavily susidised region of the UK and not Scotland wgich pays more than its fair share. So after you find the truth I will send you my account no so you can put the 50,000.00 in. An din future try and think for yourself before youScot bash. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Well can I believe you on this? After all in another post you claimed you were 'highly qualified in History' and then made it clear from your ignorance of how History is studied (and even an eighteen year old History undergraduate knows what primary and secondary sources are) that you are far from being 'highly qualified in History'. Which university did you attend ? Where I attended is actually no ones business.. and I didnt actually show any ignorance in how history is studied.. as I know full well but as usual you choose to ignore what you read and pick fault. I know how to study to a high level and any subject is the same.. so I know very well how to research. As to if you believe me.. the question is do I actually care.. Nope, not really, not going to leave sleep over it. And actually as I pointed out in another thread,having a bit of paper doesn't mean you know something. The problem with people like yourself is that you want to show the world your better than them, and actually in trying to do so you just make yourself look petty. My main qualification is in human behaviour, so your constant little replies have amused me greatly, but even I get bored because I have no wish to get into a constant.. "my dads bigger than your dad "type of situation. The fact is we only have your word on many things.. but no one has accused you of being less than you say you are. So I will not reply to you any more.. and you know your response to this message is already that predictable I could write it for you. Cali You made a stupid mistake. You told someone to 'get educated" but that someone transpired to be better educated than you. Then you told him that you were 'highly qualified' in History but unfortunately that person transpired to have a PH.D in History and as a result could tell straight away that you aren't. (And by implication you later admitted this by asserting that you have a degree in politics by the way). You made a fool of yourself. Live with it. " Ok you have both had your say, why not both drop the pissing contest now or take it private. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Well I still think Queen Camilla has a nice ring to it and even better would be Queen Camilla I of Scotlandshire. "lol, in yer dreams!!! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Well I still think Queen Camilla has a nice ring to it and even better would be Queen Camilla I of Scotlandshire.
lol, in yer dreams!!! "But it would be perfick!! You guys vote ofr independence, we send you this Bonnie Prince Charlie you been going on about for centuries, he brings Queen Camilla with him thereby passing the line of succession in England to William. Two countries, two Kings - one of whom you've been longing for for centuries (Country & King). I know, thank me later cos I'm off to Holyrood to put my proposal forward. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Well I still think Queen Camilla has a nice ring to it and even better would be Queen Camilla I of Scotlandshire.
lol, in yer dreams!!!
But it would be perfick!! You guys vote ofr independence, we send you this Bonnie Prince Charlie you been going on about for centuries, he brings Queen Camilla with him thereby passing the line of succession in England to William.
Two countries, two Kings - one of whom you've been longing for for centuries (Country & King).
I know, thank me later cos I'm off to Holyrood to put my proposal forward. "ye, but the clue is in the title!! BONNIE prince !! Not some jug eared in-bred wannabe!!! And as for camilla, give her to the nearest glue factory! We can always use more pritt stick!! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off. "And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol, | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol, "More like watch the men in skits try get out | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off. "Another racist. Is that the same tv that a scot invented | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
Another racist.
Is that the same tv that a scot invented"That is truly offensive! I am NOT a racist!  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out "Ladies from hell as they were called by the Germans in the trenches as they were regarded one of the fiercest fighting races. Would like you to come away with something like that in the company of 2 Scots Thats a fighting battalion in case you dont know. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out
Ladies from hell as they were called by the Germans in the trenches as they were regarded one of the fiercest fighting races.
Would like you to come away with something like that in the company of 2 Scots
Thats a fighting battalion in case you dont know."Is that a threat to accompany your racist comment? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Just answer one question... theoretically, if Scotland succeeded in gaining Independence, how would you define your citizenship? That of the EU. or Scotland? Back to now, you are resident in the UK which makes you a citizen of this country. If you don't share that view for whatever view, and you prefer to classify yourself as a citizen of the EU, why aren't you living in mainland Europe? I'm Scottish by birth, and am proud to call myself British, as well as Scottish. As for the English as a race, I was sent down south of the Border in 1974 with a mission to "civilise the English!"
Ye Gods, if I'd known just how darn difficult that task would be, I'd have stayed up North!!! "I think we're at cross purposes. The reference to legal citizenship of the EU, by virtue of the UK's membership and adherence to its legal provisions, was merely to highlight the equality granted at a European level that is denied by the UK establishment, which regards me in law as a subject. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out "P.S. Its KILTS not SKITS (or skirts as we scots usually spell it) | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"oooo the hatred of the English always comes out on these threads. I must have led a sheltered life as until about 12 years ago when I started using the net and in particular chat rooms I didn't realise how divided the UK actually is. The people I chatted with in those chat rooms where from all corners and the venom that used to come from Scottish and Welsh people towards the English was awful....I see it still goes on.
It won't stop me sticking up for Wales or Scotland in any sport thats going on though "In case it escaped you these posts and there have been a fair few of them have all been started by English and aimed at the Scots so how can you turn it around to an anti English post? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out
P.S. Its KILTS not SKITS (or skirts as we scots usually spell it) "Forgive him I dont think the guy is too bright. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out
P.S. Its KILTS not SKITS (or skirts as we scots usually spell it)
Forgive him I dont think the guy is too bright."lol, | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" In case it escaped you these posts and there have been a fair few of them have all been started by English and aimed at the Scots so how can you turn it around to an anti English post?" It has been not so much in this post as the last.. but I have not said anything about the Scots, not least that I am part Scottish myself and married to a Scotsman. Cali | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"oooo the hatred of the English always comes out on these threads. I must have led a sheltered life as until about 12 years ago when I started using the net and in particular chat rooms I didn't realise how divided the UK actually is. The people I chatted with in those chat rooms where from all corners and the venom that used to come from Scottish and Welsh people towards the English was awful....I see it still goes on.
It won't stop me sticking up for Wales or Scotland in any sport thats going on though
In case it escaped you these posts and there have been a fair few of them have all been started by English and aimed at the Scots so how can you turn it around to an anti English post?"Re read the thread, it will explain my post. This thread is part 2 of a thread started by Munro. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out
P.S. Its KILTS not SKITS (or skirts as we scots usually spell it) "A grammar correction for a guy who cannot get his own profile right CLASSIC! Check your profile asnd get it right if you are going to go all spelling police on me! Its not accomodate it is spelt accommodate and recieving is spelt receiving ! Get a towel there is egg on your face. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out
P.S. Its KILTS not SKITS (or skirts as we scots usually spell it)
Forgive him I dont think the guy is too bright."Full of insults this evening aren't you mind looking like that I would be well pissed off too. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Jock! Independence? It will be like parents leaving teenagers alone for the weekend! One big party, lots pissed up, lots of mess and asking the parents to clean up in the morning. I say give them it and put the cameras in and we will have a disaster/reality tv show that will run for years and have us laughing out socks off.
And then watch all the gatecrashers tryin to get in! Lol,
More like watch the men in skits try get out
P.S. Its KILTS not SKITS (or skirts as we scots usually spell it)
A grammar correction for a guy who cannot get his own profile right CLASSIC! Check your profile asnd get it right if you are going to go all spelling police on me! Its not accomodate it is spelt accommodate and recieving is spelt receiving ! Get a towel there is egg on your face. "What does ASND mean? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
