Colognejag
-
Posts
263 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Colognejag
-
-
The Weirs and Partick Thistle: Better together...
-
1
-
-
I went in the adult and child gate and was told me and the kid needed to go in together through one click of the turnstile. Bit of a crush, but that might explain some additional fans counted as one entry...
-
Well done Jaggernaut, I am glad to see you are beginning to talk about the issues. What do you not agree upon in terms of justice and the environment? Do we not have our own legal system at the moment? There may well be something to do with justice that I am looking over here, so forgive me if I am being too simplistic.
In terms of polls, I have yet to see a poll on independence where the majority has not been No. As you well know the last Scottish elections were not a referendum on independence. If it was, it would still have resulted in a majority No. The last UK elections were even worse for the SNP.
Please, tell us how the BBC has been instructed to do anything. You are sounding more and more paranoid.
WW1 was undoubtedly horrific for all sides. Surely a war a century ago is not forming your opinion on the current situation?
I respect your wish for Scotland to become independent. I do question the reasoning why you think that way, but that is your choice. Suffice to say we agree to disagree on this! I respect you more on your choice of football team..!
-
Jaggernaut - that is your understanding of the issue. If it were that bad as you put it and we are getting such a bad deal, why does the majority of Scots want to be part of the Union?! Are we No-voters too stupid?
Being part of a Union, UK/EU (or international organisation, eg. NATO) is about give and take. In some things you do well, in some others you do not. Unfortunately, that is international politics in the modern world.
Please do not call our dead armed forces canon fodder. I am sure their families and current service personnel would not take kindly to such remarks. The second Iraq war was not supported but Iraq 1 and Afganistan were both wars in which even a Scottish army would have participated in a joint NATO operation.
Is there anything in the White Paper that you question?
-
OK - thanks for the link, GI. A bit tenuous, but I'll offer that one to you
I guess this and some of the more alarmist opinions from the No side sum up their problem. In theory, they are together, but they seem a rather disparate, rudderless group where anyone is free to make any sort of statement.
The Yes campaign does seem well-drilled, hence the same bland responses and soundbites when questioned. My previous point stands - the longer they trot out the same lines, the less people will value the contributions.
I, maybe not you, hope the No campaign starts showing a bit more thought. Question the issues, but in a more thoughtful manner and have a proper team directing it all. I suspect the No majority would increase a lot more...
-
The way you put it Jaggernaut the current situation sounds cataclysmic...
I repeat that the No campaign has said that Scotland COULD go independent, but thinks Scotland is better off as part of the UK. I have not heard anyone say we are too small or stupid.
I do not think that the UK or EU are perfect, but I do believe we are better off being part of these unions in the global perspective. I am happy to question opinions from the No campaign.
Is there anything in the White Paper you question?
-
Norge - I know no Scot in my circles in Germany that are for independence either. Since Norway is a country often praised by the Yes campaign, it is interesting to hear from you that Scots living there appear not to want Scotland to follow the example.
On the issue of passports, following a Yes vote, I understand we can keep a UK passport until it expires. We would then have to get a Scottish one. The White Paper states that the RUK government should allow dual nationality to allow us to have both a UK and Scottish passport, but admits this would be up to the RUK to decide... No guarantee this will happen.
The only firm fact I have is that I would eventually get a Scottish passport. The only other option would be for me to become a German citizen. I guess Scots living in England could become RUK citizens based on residency as well.
Salmond may talk down the break up of the UK and say we will still be a family of friends. On the passport/nationality issue, this is far from clear.
The worst part is that the majority of exiles cannot even vote on an issue that could determine their own nationality.
-
1
-
-
GI - I would be very surprised if the No campaign described themselves as Project Fear. If you are correct and have proof then I take that one back. However, my point is that the more they trot out the same response the more dangerous it is for them. It all sounds like PR "experts" have told them to say these soundbites, if you say things again and again, people might start to believe you...
To be fair to the No campaign they have said that Scotland could go independent in theory, but state that they believe Scotland is better off within the Union. I do not see that as hysterical.
Robertson's comments were bizarre in my opinion. Maybe that's where you and I differ. I am open to questioning all sides of the argument, even if it is coming from a fellow Unionist. I hear too many on the Yes side accepting everything Salmond says.
Jaggernaut - since Salmond wants all exiles to assume Scottish nationality, it is not such a ludicrous statement to imply that they will be foreigners in RUK - how could non-nationals then be in Parliament! This may seem like a flippant comment on a TV show to you. You call it racist, I see it as another example where some people do not understand the real implications and magnitude of a break-up of the UK. As an exile myself, this is an area I take very seriously.
-
To be honest, I am getting fed up of the times I hear the Yes campaign trot out the likes of "Project Fear" "bluff and bluster" "scaremongering" every time they respond to an argument that goes against their viewpoint.
I think they may well be taking people for fools. Most people have made up their minds on the issue. The ones undecided need convincing and want to have reasoned debate.
I would give more credit to the Yes campaign if they said things might not be better on every issue, but the goal of independence is worth it. If people who do not know who to vote for heard more honesty, they may well be more inclined to vote for who they can trust most. Childish responses to serious debate does not wash with those who clearly need convincing.
-
Crap for me too - I am back for two and a half weeks, anticipating I would see a fair bit of the business end of the season - now I only get to see the games on the 5th and 19th...
-
PT - why is the first round on the 19th?
We play Hertz on the 5th, then a 2 week wait for post-split games. My Jags calendar also has this gap. Is it for the Scottish Cup semis?
-
I didn't call you or your family britnats, but I have no qualms about using the word to describe those whose position is one of "Rule Britannia" at all costs, to prevent Scotland's independence. You find the term "deeply offensive?" So what? I find blind loyalty to Westminster domination over Scotland, and the decades of lying and the plundering of Scotland's resources for the benefit of the Westminster ruling classes to be deeply offensive, to an entire nation.
I have no idea about the SNP's plans for a Scottish passport design. Why bring the SNP here? My position on passports has nothing to do with the SNP.
And don't forget, the referendum isn't about the SNP.
The White Paper clearly is all about the SNP.
You called me britnat some time ago on here. Given the mostly interesting and reflective posts on here from the vast majority of people on both sides of the debate, the content and tone of your posts suggests that quite clearly, you are the one brainwashed and with blind loyalty...
-
2
-
-
Citizens of a Member State cease to be citizens of the EU if that Member State leaves the European Union. The mechanism for leaving is set out in detail in the Lisbon Treaty. Scotland, by leaving the United Kingdom, would cease to be in the EU because its citizens had voted to leave the Member State. The citizens of England, Wales and Northern Ireland would remain in the United Kingdom and bound by the terms of the Lisbon Treaty.
You claim that Scots who are living in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are going to be made illegal aliens in the rUK. That is not true. They are citizens of the United Kingdom with EU passports and their country of birth is irrelevant. They are in the same position as those who were born in outside the UK but who now have UK citizenship. The same principle applies to Scots with British cItizenship who are living in other EU countries. The SNP have disenfranchised them from the referendum.
In practice, having left the EU, Scotland would need to create its own citizenship scheme and issue new Scottish passports. Citizens of other EU Member States who are resident in Scotland would simply have to apply for visas like any non-Scottish citizen, e.g. Americans, Canadians and Australians. EU citizens living in Scotland (even for a few months only), unlike Scots living in rUK and abroad, do have a vote in the referendum.
Scots who are living in other countries would have to apply for Scottish citizenship, possibly having dual nationality. I have friends who have dual nationality, i.e. Britain and another country, e.g. the US and Israel. It is a perfectly reasonable solution legally and practically.
On the issue of borders, an independent Scotland could enter into a separate agreements with the rUK and the EU. Norway and Switzerland, not in the EU, joined the Schengen Area and has no border controls. Scotland could join the Schengen Area too even though Britain is not currently a member.
Hope this is clear.
Kni - I have wondered if it is possible to have dual nationality between two EU member states? I think you can have both an Irish and UK passport if you are from N. Ireland (?), although that situation is unique on many levels. If Scotland were to be independent and in the EU, could you theoretically have a Scottish and, say, German passport, assuming you would qualify for both?
-
With respect Norge, the answers to all the questions you put there can be found in the white paper. They may not be the answers you wish to see, but they are there.
The white paper is only what the SNP would like to happen. It is not what would happen.
So many issues within it are not in the SNP's hands - currency, EU, citizenship and so on. Many others have to be negotiated first. There is a lot of presumption.
Who knows what government would be formed post-independence. Labour? SNP? A coalition? The white paper assumes it will be another majority SNP government.Who knows what policies any other governmant would want and negotiate with the rUK?
That is what worries me about this being a blind vote.
The SNP may cry foul play on key issues. Of course, Scotland should automatically become an EU member state. I actiually agree that it would be "an affront to demoncracy." However, we are talking about international politics. It is not always nice and cuddly, self-interest rules...
For some people, independence is the only thing that matters. I respect that. Others will not be moved from the status quo. Fair enough.
There have been many searching posts here recently. A lot of the content of which sums up the wider public - we still need more information to make a balanced, informed decision on this.
-
Wow, britnat specs alert! The UK is by far the most isolationist member of the EU, and will probably become even more isolated when the UKIP-inspired referendum leads to the rUK withdrawing entirely from it. But maybe you think that UK isolationism = good, but independent Scotland playing its own role on the world and European stages = bad.
Do you think that an independent Scotland would somehow be sitting all lonely in the world, with no friends or allies, all forlorn? Aw, the shame!
Why choose Ireland? Why not Luxembourg, or Switzerland, or Norway?
"Britnat"? - what are you 12 years old or something?
You assume much. I said I believe in unions. I believe in the EU (despite it's many failings). It is only the Conservative party that is propsoing a referendum, not the UK as a whole. For your information, it is not just people in the UK that are fed up of issues within the EU. Here in Germany, there are many who have had enough of social tourism. They want EU reform on this too.
I do think that an independent Scotland, ouside the EU, would be lonely in the world, with very few friends and allies. That's why so many countries are keen to be in unions/alliances. You look after your own. Stuff the rest.
I pick Ireland as an example, since we do not have the oil fund of Norway, the riches of Switzerland, or the banking and EU presence of Luxemburg. Nobody really knows how long our oil will last. It is fine saying we will be ok with the oil. What will we be like the day it is gone? When Ireland's money dried out it had to be bailed out by the EU. Who would bail us out?
-
But how will we ever get to know, one way or the other? Will Cameron tell us precisely what our future will hold? Will Salmond? I think not, because they cannot know. The choice is down to whether, in the uncertain world ahead, we should have Westminster make all of our important decisions for us and accept the decreasing amount of pocket money they decide to give us so that they can keep most of it for their own projects, or else we take care of our own income and decisions and do what is best for us, not for Westminster.
Which is why I called it a blind vote...
Well, my view is that if the world is that uncertain, it is best not to risk the unions that we are members of at present. Some decisions made within we will like, some we will not like.
In an increasingly global world, the more allies you have the better for you. Isolationism is certainly not the way ahead in my book.
I think it plain wrong for you to imply that we give Westminster all our gold and get peanuts in return. Decreasing pocket money? Do you honestly think that if we had been independent before the present global recession, we would not be making cutbacks ourselves? Fact would be that we would be as bad, if not worse, than Ireland, at the moment..! Hence the value of being in a Union, even though it may be unpleasant at times...
-
I honestly can't believe your first statement in bold. No idea?????
You'll never get definitive answers to what will happen in the future. Not from unionists about what will happen to Scotland in the event of a no vote, or even about what will happen to the UK in the future. When will the next financial crisis and soaring unemployment occur? When will Britain wage was against another muslim country? We don't know. Voting no is just as blind, except that you can be sure than nothing will get better for Scotland. A yes vote means that things might get better; they could not get worse. - now that is very much a matter of opinion!
Exactly - no idea. The consequences of not keeping the pound or being in the EU are huge. If we do not know the answer to these two fundemental questions then, no, we have absolutely no idea what sort of Scotland we are voting for or against... I am surprised you cannot see how this is exceptionally important to know before we vote on the matter.
-
1
-
-
Then, presumably, the latest turn of events will be music to your ears. No pound and no EU - what's to stop you voting Yes now?
As much as I think Gideon is bluffing, there is some strand of logic to his stance. Barroso's stance, however, is completely nonsensical. The EU has just welcomed Bulgaria and Romania with open arms and we are expected to believe that Scotland, a country whose citizens have been part of the EU for forty years, will find it 'almost possible' to be admitted? These countries existed previously. An independent Scotland is a "new" country. Scotland would be voting out of a country which has been a member for 40 years.
Plus - and I have said this already on here - where would that leave the tens of thousands of EU citizens who currently reside in Scotland, not to mention the Spanish fishing trawlers sailing around Scotland? Are they going to be abandoned? No, they have their own EU passports. If Scotland wre not a member of the EU, the majoity would probably leave, I guess. The fact that a completely unprepared East Germany was absorbed into the EU without anyone batting an eyelid at the time has also been ignored as well. Technically speaking, the Federal Republic of Germany was a brand new state. Technically by whose account? The difference being East Germany was absorbed INTO an existing EU country. Scotland would be getting itself OUT of an existing EU country.
That Andrew Marr interview was appallingly, almost laughably biased. Barroso - a politician who has his own secessionist worries to contend with, in case we forget - was asked a clearly leading question by Marr, who then failed to ask him to expand on it.
You may be right about Baroso, but he sums up the problem. The EU as an organisation may very well not have a problem with Scotland joining, but it is not up to the EU . It is up to the individual EU member states to decide. As we know, there are many reasons why some EU individual states might not want Scotland to become independent out of self-interests... Scotland/the UK/the EU cannot control this...
-
1
-
-
What people who swallow the "no bbc", "no currency union", "no pensions", "border guards", "no defence jobs" etc claptrap don't seem to realise is that britnats have no other option than to say these things. They have no other option than to say them, but they know that they are patently untrue. Of course an independent Scotland (and rUK) will most probably share the pound, of course Scottish pensions will be safe (probably safer than in rUK), of course there will be no border between Scotland and England, of course Scottish industry will include a defence sector. But by admitting that all of these are not just possible but almost certain, the britnats would be seen in public to acknowledge the fact that an independent Scotland will be a thriving and successful country that is no longer getting shafted by England for its own selfish purposes. And of course they've brainwashed many otherwise reasonable people into either believing (sad) or simply parroting (even sadder) the same claptrap.
Sounds like you are the one brainwashed here...
"of course, of course, of course..." There seems to be absolutely nothing that is a matter of course!!! At present, no-one knows what is going to happen. This is the real problem of the vote. We have no idea what we will be voting for or against...
I would much rather the negotiations started a long time ago so we actually knew what we would be voting for.
- Better together says no to pound, Salmond says yes to pound - ok that seems clear enough
- EU commissioner say EU will be difficult (not due to EU per se, but due to individual country's self interests), Salmond says EU no problem - ok that seems clear enough
The crux of the matter is that it is not up to an independent Scotland to decide upon these matters, whether we would like to or not. This is the price of becoming independent. A independent country has to accept the conditions of entry into new trade areas/institutuions.
I would much rather know definitievely the answers to these questions, otherwise it is a blind vote.
-
1
- Better together says no to pound, Salmond says yes to pound - ok that seems clear enough
-
To be fair, not just Rangers.
Imagine the coincidence that Aberdeen, St. Johnstone and Dundee Utd were also kept apart...
-
2
-
-
That is an interesting point. Turning that on its head, how do you account for ticket prices elsewhere in Europe being much cheaper yet they are still able to pay their wages, stadiums, etc? Particularly the smaller teams in those leagues.
I think the set-up in many Eurpean countries is very different. Many stadia are council-owned and leased to the clubs. Many clubs are are membership-based clubs. They vote in the committe that runs the club. Therefore the committee has to be fan-friendly if they are to keep their jobs. It is also plain wrong to say that all Bundesliga tickets are cheap - the terracing ones may be cheaper (but since we don't have this, there is no debate). The seating is not cheap by any means - last game I went to was two years ago 1. FC Köln vs Mainz 05 a steal at 45 euro...
-
So what? There is enough North Sea oil to last well beyond all of our lifetimes. Depends how old you are! What about the UK's dependency on oil for shoring up it's crippled financial status and financing its illegal wars, nuclear weapons, new titanic, etc. etc. It is less dependent as a whole on this one sector than Scotland would be on it's own.
How many times does it need to be said: Scottish independence is not about oil, and it's not about Alex Salmond. Funny you are right - it was until yesterday. Now we have the child care debate to add to these two.
You'll know that the UK is now extremely dependent on financial services. How fragile an economy is that! All it needs is for the EU to decide that most transactions need to be conducted in a Eurozone country (and many politicians would like to see this), and London will be entirely crippled. Then I suspect the UK would leave the EU.
How do you see the UK paying off its debt? And how smart do you think the UK government has been to allow it to get to that unbelievable sum in the first place? How will Scotland pay off it's debt? Do you think that if Scotland had been independent over the past 5 years it would not have any debts or have to cut back beudgets?!
I think you should be more honest and say that nothing would make you change your voting intention. A question not directed at me, but there is nothing that would change my voting intention. Sadly, democtratic Alex is not allowing this Scot to vote on the matter...
-
This is what I don't get. The question is "should Scotland be independent", but the actual question should be "do you agree with the snp's vision of an independent scotland detailed in it's white paper." Two very different things.
I suspect a "yes" vote would be higher for the first question than the second...
Anyway, it is all theoretical for me - despite being Scottish I don't even get to vote living over here. Thanks for that Alex.
-
Calm down dears.
I think we are fixed upon this issue. It is not uncommon to have both sets of fans in the same areas.
Here is Germany, they even wear away colours in the home end. It is only in the "ultras" area, where it actually says on the ticket that away fans are not welcome.
Bleed them for as much money as we can... if they behave like twats, kick them out.
-
1
-
Where Have All The Fans Gone
in Main Jags forum
Posted
I had to pay 46 euro to watch Monchengladbach vs Mainz recently...
The cheap tickets are for the terracing, they are not all this price - effectively subsidised by higher seating prices I guess...