And they are off! Indy2 in October 2023 !

[Nick]

How do you reply to this delusion? Having the queen doesnt mean nick , that they are ruled by "britian".

Yes we covered that previously. 

[Thomas]

What you are saying thomas is that you will tear up an international treaty that you agreed to and  signed in good faith  ?

What is the time scale  on being able to change your mind (asking for a freind )  , 400 years ,4 months ,a generation  ?

also to point out you are alright making these big proclamations on democracy yourself streetwalker , and how the jocks should be allowed a vote when you think there is little chance of it.

When push comes to shove though , and it looks like ther might be another vote , your dissenting voice gets added to the anti democratic throng.

Unlike you , my stance and principles on demcocracy remains the same. You can have votes and referendums any time you like , as long as each time the vote is implemented. As i told your anti democratic remain countrymen post 2016 when they tried to overturn democracy.

Being anti democratic is never a good look , and usually has the adverse affect. I would imagine sturgeon is lapping up the calls from your nation to stop scotland having a say , should add a few more moderate votes to the indy vote each time an anti democrat demands boris bans us jocks from voting.

[Thomas]

All the nations in the commonwealth are officially ruled by Britain as they have the Queen as head of state. Just because she never gets involved and lets them do their own thing doesn't matter a jot, they still come under British rule. So yes in essence they are the same thing. Green is Commonwealth, Red is British Empire. Look similar?

How do you reply to this delusion? Having the queen doesnt mean nick , that they are ruled by "britian".

[Thomas]

What you are saying thomas is that you will tear up an international treaty that you agreed to and  signed in good faith  ?

Are you saying a nation that freely entered into a treaty of union doesnt have the right to withdraw  , 6 years after you championed your own country having that same right in withdrawing from the european one? The hypocrisy and double standards are breathtaking.

What is the time scale  on being able to change your mind (asking for a freind )  , 400 years ,4 months ,a generation

The first time the treaty of union was challenged was a mere few years after it was initially signed.

I would say the timescale can be any time .

How democracy works ,  you elect a party that gains a majority to enforce your views. The normal timespan is every 4 /5 years , and then you vote again. That what we have done.  Democracy itself is a neverendum .

[T00ts]

I should perhaps admit a conflict of interest here. I went to college on a scholarship but was left pretty hard up. I applied to several organisations for a Bursary. I was awarded 3 which helped no end. One of them was the Commonwealth Institute. Each year they invited all their awardees to a garden party. I attended at the Commonwealth Institute in Kensington in those day. There I met all sorts of nationalities and all sorts of students, particularly a Ghanaian Pre Med. To this day I regret not accepting his offer of coffee based purely on the evil looks of others in the tube train as we chatted together. He was real gentleman. I guess those were still the days of No Irish, No Dogs, No Blacks, and even in those days I had a timid streak except when confronted with an impossible dance move!

[T00ts]

It could do — and may still do — but it currently has little (if any) similarity to the EU. The greatest difference is that it is not a trading body or partnership...

Their ethos seems to be on a higher plane than those aspired by either the USA or the EU. It is a partnership in that the countries combine to make situations better for all - but not at the cost of some. 


https://thecommonwealth.org/our-work/trade-and-economy

[patman post]

Yes you're correct, but in any case, the commonwealth is still a huge union that knocks the EU into the proverbial hat.

It could do — and may still do — but it currently has little (if any) similarity to the EU. The greatest difference is that it is not a trading body or partnership...

[Nick]

I am not sure that is true. I understood that the Commonwealth of nearly 50 states is made up of those who do still have the Queen as Sovereign (about 15 from memory) but others have independence but choose to remain members or the Commonwealth. It has been the Queen's life work and involves about a third of the world population.

https://thecommonwealth.org/our-member-countries

Yes you're correct, but in any case, the commonwealth is still a huge union that knocks the EU into the proverbial hat. 

[T00ts]

All the nations in the commonwealth are officially ruled by Britain as they have the Queen as head of state. Just because she never gets involved and lets them do their own thing doesn't matter a jot, they still come under British rule. So yes in essence they are the same thing.

I am not sure that is true. I understood that the Commonwealth of nearly 50 states is made up of those who do still have the Queen as Sovereign (about 15 from memory) but others have independence but choose to remain members or the Commonwealth. It has been the Queen's life work and involves about a third of the world population. 

https://thecommonwealth.org/our-member-countries

[Nick]

dear god , are you seriously claiming the comonwealth is the modern british empire? Its like talking to someone at the mad hatters tea party nick. Its a freely entered association to give england a sense of being important in the world. They even dropped the name "british " from it.

Funnily enough not one of those nations have ever asked to come back under london rule have they?

None of this is anything to do with my point , which is once again london prime minisnters didnt want anyone to leave their empire but it still happened.

All the nations in the commonwealth are officially ruled by Britain as they have the Queen as head of state. Just because she never gets involved and lets them do their own thing doesn't matter a jot, they still come under British rule. So yes in essence they are the same thing. Green is Commonwealth, Red is British Empire. Look similar?

[Streetwalker]

meant to say streetwalker , you british nationalists can't have it both ways mate.

Nick and john of gwent both tell me scotland can't leave the union  , as we are englands prisoner and must have permission from england de facto parliament.

You then above go on to back up what i have said , where you claim scotland was englands partner in crime  , and freely entered into an agreement called the treaty of union , which we can as a nation freely withdraw from . So which is it?

As lord cooper said in 1953 , the sovereignty of parliament is a distinctly english principle that hs no counterpart in scottish law..........

In scottish law , the people are sovereign , and express that sovereignty through their elected represetatives.

a majority of the scottish people recognise scotland mandate to have another indyref , and tahts what matters.

What you are saying thomas is that you will tear up an international treaty that you agreed to and  signed in good faith   ?

What is the time scale  on being able to change your mind (asking for a freind )  , 400 years ,4 months ,a generation  ?

[Thomas]

You can't leave what in many repects you where front and centre in creating . Was it not the Scots who went to the four corners of the globe as settlers ,administrators and plantation owners ? Was it not the Scots who were at the front of every battle that aquired lands for the Empire ?

Scotlands economy was built on the empire you only have to look at the names on a map of the world to see the influence the Scots had ,in fact it should be renamed the Scottish Empire , all England did was keep order to it

meant to say streetwalker , you british nationalists cant have it both ways mate.

Nick and john of gwent both tell me scotland cant leave the union  , as we are englands prisoner and must have permission from england de facto parliament.

You then above go on to back up what i have said , where you claim scotland was englands partner in crime  , and freely entered into an agreement called the treaty of union , which we can as a nation freely withdraw from . So which is it?

As lord cooper said in 1953 , the sovereignty of parliament is a distinctly english principle that hs no counterpart in scottish law..........

In scottish law , the people are sovereign , and express that sovereignty through their elected represetatives.

a majority of the scottish people recognise scotland mandate to have another indyref , and tahts what matters.

[Thomas]

You can't leave what in many repects you where front and centre in creating .

That is my point. We helped create the united kingdom , and we most certainly , as an equal signatory of the treaty of union , can indeed leave it without your countries permission.

Was it not the Scots who went to the four corners of the globe as settlers ,administrators and plantation owners ? Was it not the Scots who were at the front of every battle that aquired lands for the Empire ?

Scotlands economy was built on the empire you only have to look at the names on a map of the world to see the influence the Scots had ,in fact it should be renamed the Scottish Empire , all England did was keep order to it 

we can talk about history if you want , the rights and wrongs of empire, who is to blame etc etc , but the bottom line is , this isnt anything to do with my point regarding holding referendums or scotland ending the uk.

The point about the empire i was raising was self evidently that you didnt want other nations to leave but it still happened. Im not demanding other nations come under scotland rule , or fantasising about the rebirth of a long gone empire.

[Thomas]

Point being, you like to use the Empire as a point of jest, to suggest that Britain is clinging onto something that doesn't really exist anymore. It may have shrunk over the years but it's still 5 times bigger than the EU.

dear god , are you seriously claiming the comonwealth is the modern british empire? Its like talking to someone at the mad hatters tea party nick. Its a freely entered association to give england a sense of being important in the world. They even dropped the name "british " from it.

Funnily enough not one of those nations have ever asked to come back under london rule have they?

None of this is anything to do with my point , which is once again london prime minisnters didnt want anyone to leave their empire but it still happened.

[Thomas]

How about "not give permission for the Scottish devolved parliament to hold the referendum"

the scottish devolved parliament isnt asking for permission. The scottish sovereign people , and our elected representatives , who  are in a freely entered union with england , are going to hold a referendum to end the treaty of union.

I didn't say what he would do, and I don't know what he will do.

But if he does not allow it, it won't happen, and if it does, it won't be legal.

it wont be legal under which law? In our country unlike yours we dont use english law. We use scottish law , and under scottish constitutional law , the scots people are sovereign , and they give permission for the uk parliament to govern scotland. We can also legally withdraw that persmission.

Did france say england leaving the EU wasnt legal under french law?