[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

Plenty of good reasons to vote yes Ernie, I never did think the CBI would endorse the yes campaign its support for the union has been well known for decades really. I am content to watch the chaos at the CBI with a hint of schadenfreude.

Just to be clear no I am not saying the CBI is endorsing independence. As I said above the CBI s position has been obvious for decades. They did try to present themselves as being neutral on the issue though but a good campaign from Business for Scotland and the CBIs own cac handed administration put an end to that.

It's hardly surprising that an American subsidy junkie like BAE would be against an independent Scotland with a centre left EU-oriented government with modest geopolitical ambitions. Without the UK's desire to be a "world class" military power, there won't be much business for them north of the border, and fewer tame politicians to suppress corruption investigations.

As a general rule, whatever the military-industrial complex suggests - do the opposite.

Plenty of good reasons to vote yes Ernie

That is something I was prepared to consider a distinct possibility until I saw this thread. But then all I have been offered is stuff like "the CBI is in chaos" or "the No campaign is trying to frighten us" by Yes supporters, instead of actually offering compelling reasons why voting Yes would be positively good beyond meaningless petty nationalism.

The often repeated claim that it would also benefit the less prosperous regions of the UK has likewise lacked any sort of coherent argument to back it up ....... it appears to be left to people's imagination to work out in what ways it would help.

Fasternotfatter - I'm not saying there are no big companies against independence - the CBI's behaviour is proof of that - but of your list:

BAE - yes, big surprise they don't like the idea.
Shell - said they're equally worried about Scottish independence and the UK EU referendum.
BP - stated that the company was impartial and Bob Dudley was expressing a personal opinion.
Standard Life - just making contingency plans, company has made it clear they're impartial.
RBS - based on the idea they might have to move their HQ*
Weir - a company that's been fined for trying to bribe dictators. See BAE.

*this suggestion has been made several times, the logic seems to be that the EU requires a bank to be headquartered in the same country as the majority of it's business. But since Scotland is going to be unceremoniously kicked out of the EU (allegedly), why should we comply with EU rules? It also blows a hole in the argument that RBS is a Scottish bank which an independent Scotland wouldn't have been able to bail out.

Ernie - one big compelling reason: No more nuclear weapons.

For many people, that's enough.

No more nuclear weapons is a good one, I'll give you that. Although I'm less convinced that on its own it is a good enough reason or that it has sufficient widespread support - I would suggest that it is way down the list of priorities for most people, even if it is on their list. Otherwise parties such as the Greens would get huge support in general elections. But as it is 80% of the electorate always vote for one of the three major parties which are committed to the retention of WMDs.

Ben that is revisionism of the highest order especially re RBS and as for "no nukes" (cough) absolutely brilliant. Don't ask, don't tell does not in any way equate to no nukes. Google Ole Kvaerno for some Danish honesty on that issue.

So one big lie sums up the whole issue for "many people". How appropriate. There is hope for Farrage yet/too.

Salmond as Prime Minister and Farrage with increased power. Oh dear. Would that be an 'axis' of some description?

Good piece in the Times last week by Hugo Ri****d, saddened that Scots are turning to nationalism, and that even a 60% vote in favour of the UK is no real victory, although a 51% vote in favour of independence will be celebrated with gusto.
I agree with his statement that Scotland may or may not be better off economically, but will certainly be weakened culturally.
Will be a sad day indeed, and nukes certainly fall well down my list of priorities. Too many people get their knickers in a twist over Faslane to feel good about themselves.

It would create a new collective noun ATG - a "falsehood of politicians" with Alex and Nigel as figureheads.

THM - in what way has there been any lack of clarity over the nukes? The only point of debate is how quickly they can be removed. All Yes groups have been totally clear, after independence the nuclear weapons are going.

Ernie - one big compelling reason: No more nuclear weapons.

For many people, that's enough.

Huh, only just noticed the Russian bomber appears to belong to the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-27157504

Ben your original statement was "Most big companies who have expressed an opinion have said that independence will make little or no difference and they're not going to take a position" and now I have got you to admit that "I'm not saying there are no big companies against independence", closer to the truth is that big companies have indeed expressed concerns about independence. So lets have a look at your list
[i]
BAE - yes, big surprise they don't like the idea.[/i] OK so you agree there.
[i]Shell - said they're equally worried about Scottish independence and the UK EU referendum.[/i] the fact that they are worried about the EU in no way means they are not worried about Scottish independence.
[i]BP - stated that the company was impartial and Bob Dudley was expressing a personal opinion.[/i] Bob Dudley is the CEO of BP his personal opinion is based on his experience working at BP, the points he makes about the EU and currency are hardly minor concerns.
[i]Standard Life - just making contingency plans, company has made it clear they're impartial.[/i] Moving your headquarters is hardly "little or no difference"
[i]RBS - based on the idea they might have to move their HQ*[/i] See previous response.
[i]Weir - a company that's been fined for trying to bribe dictators. See BAE.[/i] That doesn't mean that they are not a big company with concerns about independence.

However you try to spin this your original statement was incorrect.

teamhurtmore - Member

Ben that is revisionism of the highest order especially re RBS and as for "no nukes" (cough) absolutely brilliant. Don't ask, don't tell does not in any way equate to no nukes. Google Ole Kvaerno for some Danish honesty on that issue.

The claim is that an independent Scotland would not be a nuclear armed country, the suggestion isn't that Scotland would declare a nuclear weapon free zone in its territorial waters.

Which would clearly be impractical when you consider both Scotland's geographical location and its desire to secure NATO membership.

The treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok, and Pelindaba, might have established nuclear weapon free zones across the globe but such a treaty to cover the North Atlantic is clearly beyond the scope of an independent Scotland until the US, the UK, France, and Russia, fully comply with the commitments they made when they signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Bearing in mind that the UK is planning a new generation of nuclear weapons, in complete violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, I think we can safely assume that it will be a long time coming.

I'm not sure how much you would be able to blame an independent Scotland for that.

The claim is that an independent Scotland would not be a nuclear armed country, the suggestion isn't that Scotland would declare a nuclear weapon free zone in its territorial waters.

So, if the Royal Navy neither confirm or deny that they are carrying nuclear weapons on their Vanguard class Nuclear Submarines, then they can carry on using Faslane?

The Royal Navy would be a foreign navy, it would be up to an independent Scotland within its NATO obligations to make such decisions. Scotland itself wouldn't be nuclear armed.

EDIT : I do agree that an independent Scotland would have to deal with some seriously conflicting issues if it wished to be both free of nuclear weapons and a fully integrated NATO member.

But then we also see contradictions with regards to EU membership.

As has been previously suggested a the term "independent Scotland" could only be used in the loosest sense, both EU and NATO membership would seriously restrict Scotland's ability to govern itself freely, as does the present situation to the UK.

What does your last statement mean? "As does the present situation to the Uk bit." It is possible I agree wholeheartedly with that...

I am English and pro union but I just can't see how independence should be decided on whether the numbers add up.
Vote with your hearts not your wallets.

What does your last statement mean? "As does the present situation to the Uk bit." It is possible I agree wholeheartedly with that...

It means that I don't consider that Britain can act like a fully independent nation as long as it remains a member of both NATO and the EU.

I would like to see an independent non-aligned Britain free from the EU. I doubt very much that you wholeheartedly agree with that since you appear to be a strong supporter of Yes Scotland.

You would be right,I would substitute Westminster for NATO and the EU.

zippykona - Member
I am English and pro union but I just can't see how independence should be decided on whether the numbers add up.
Vote with your hearts not your wallets

Nah,we are tight with money,anyway,it is all because we hate English accents(fnf) or just the English in general,at least according to this thread.

You also need to look at the difference between short-term numbers and long-term ones.

Short-term, we can have as many arguments as you like about oil reserves, balance of oayments, percentage of the economy involved in the financial sector, etc etc. Danny Alexander is planning to come to Scotland next week to lay out the facts - sound familiar?

But long-term, everyone agrees that Scotland would be successful as an independent country. Even David Cameron said so.

Worrying too much about the short-term stuff is like deciding on a lifetime's marriage based on who pays for the sandwiches at the wedding reception.

balance of oayments

Disappointed that wasn't miss spelt 'oatments'

Hey duckman I am merely pointing out the casually racist attitude displayed by a lot of Scots towards English people.

Nope,you were sprouting rubbish,as pointed out by one of your fellow pro union posters.And induldging in a spot of casual racism yourself.
On this thread we have been referred to as sweatys or jocks.I don't recall you or anybody else suggesting those terms were offensive.Indeed STW had a 7 page thread where it was debated whether the term jock was offensive,started by a contributor on this thread,lots of contributors added more inventive terms.(Apparently it isn't, we are just sensitive,also a common reply to any suggestion the no campaign is negative on this one) This was done early in the thread,don't worry;nobody else could provide any more convincing proof than your Scots don't like English accents crap. In the meantime,tolerant England still has 278,000 hate crimes a year.

I would never refer to a Scottish person as a sweaty or a jock. However it is undeniable that there is anti-English feeling in Scotland. [url= http://www.scotsman.com/anti-english-bullying-1-1810591 ]Here is some proof.[/url] I don't condone the names that some English people use to refer to Scots and I am sure you would not condone the violence against English people by some Scots. For the record the line about "Cameron sounding so English that you can't bare it" was a wind up, did it touch a raw nerve? 😉

Worked with a guy a 'Taste of London' a while back.

He got the crap kicked out of him in Bristol. He was by himself having a pint waiting for a train, was attacked from behind without any known provocation other than the stated "being a (insert derogatory names for Scots here) ****"

You could almost say there are idiots everywhere. They no know boundaries and are truly one of the most internationalist movements to be found anywhere in the world.

Purely from personal experience, I've observed far less anti foreign person sentiment in Scotland than I did in England. At least that's been the case in my corner of Scotland.

Nope,bollocks like that statement allows folks to put your posts on this thread into context.As for touching a raw nerve? Nah,I have encountered lots of English who have a disparaging view of Scots,based on their own sense of superiority.Bearing in mind the thread I mentioned,hardly a surprise there is another posting on here.

Purely from personal experience, I've observed far less anti foreign person sentiment in Scotland than I did in England. At least that's been the case in my corner of Scotland.

Slightly clunky statement konabunny, but I know what you mean. Don't know the percentages, however I would imagine Scotland can only ever dream about the kind of ethnic and cultural diversity apparent in England. This diversity of a population in a relatively small space does bring pressures and issues to be discussed, hence the rise of UKIP.
Scotland can then stand at the sideline and proclaim a moral superiority.
The truth is that the UK and England in particular has been a welcoming place for immigrants of all backgrounds. Scotland has not been the destination of choice for the overwhelming majority. Would be interesting to see the statistics for Afro Carribean immigration to Scotland.
Scotland will not be the destination of choice post independence either, hence our culturally weakened state.
The welcoming nature of Scotland becomes apparent when my wife, who has lived here for 10 years, feels guilty about voting no. She feels that it is not her place to try to burst the bubble of Utopia voiced by the noisy nationalists.

Duckman the original statement was asking why Cameron is loathed when he has done less damage to the UK than the two previous Scottish PMs Brown and Blair. As is often the case the question was avoided. So English people have a sense of superiority, it is generalisations like this that are the basis for all forms of racism. [url= http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/1-in-3-english-racism-victims-1-900068 ]1 in 3 English living in Scotland suffer racial abuse.[/url]

[b]I have encountered [/b]lots of English who have a disparaging view of Scots,based on their own sense of superiority.

So English people have a sense of superiority,

Spot the difference. If generalisations are the basis for racism, stop making them.

Nope fnf,you will have to do better than that,your statement was that "we hate cameron because he sounds so english." Here is a wee uncomfortable fact for you..Tony Blair has spent more time in Oz than Scotland,and we do hate him as well.I was surprised by your link as there were only 4012 reported hate crimes in Scotland last year,does that mean there are only 12,000 English folks up here? As for the first one,it contained 8 incidents of anti English harrasment the most recent of which is 3 years old.We are supposed to be sensitive,yet a holiday comp for during the time England were in the football is one of your examples of racist Scots?
Suggesting the majority of Scots are anti English and voting because we hate David Cameron is just you being lazy at best,or displaying a sense of superiority based on being English that I encountered a lot of in my 9 years in London.Mind you,I didn't say all English people had a sense of superiority,but as said above,generalize away!

Wrong again Duckman my exact words were "Scots only dislike Cameron because he sounds so English that you can't bare it". I have provided proof that some Scots are Racist towards English people, the link above says it is as high as 1 in 3 English people living in Scotland have faced discrimination, face it you have a problem up there. Blair was born in Scotland he is your I am afraid whether you like it or not. I also suggest you look up the difference between exaggerate and generalise. I will leave the generalisations to you being as you are so good at it.

For the record the line about "Cameron sounding so English that you can't bare it" was a wind up, did it touch a raw nerve?

OK then,I will leave you and anybody reading your contributions to think about how valid any of the nonsense you spout is,you know when you decide a week later it is a "wind up" As for generalizations may I ref you to both stef and JY above...

It is actually spelt generalisations, or after independence are you planning on using American English just like you are supposedly going to use the pound? I did read the reply from Stef and dismissed it as pedantry, at least junkyard is getting into the spirit of things.

Is that the best you can do? Tell you what,I wish to change my opinion on the way my tablet spelt it. Shall I do it next week and pretend it was a joke? Just to fit in with you. Stef picks you up on misquoting and it is pedantry? ARF! Must be a bit of a sod when you display how stupid you are then dig yourself in deeper A WEEK LATER!

Does anyone have a good popcorn gif?

I do,no idea how to convince it to display mind.

What proportion of the Scottish population is foreign compared to that of England?

All the sassenachs living up there for starters.

......my exact words were "Scots only dislike Cameron because he sounds so English that you can't bare it"............ Blair was born in Scotland he is your I am afraid whether you like it or not.

And whether you like it or not Tony Blair sounds every bit as English as David Cameron.

So if as you claim the only reason why Scots dislike Cameron is because he sounds so English, then they must dislike Blair in equal measures.

I think you'll find that the real reason Scots don't like Cameron is because he is a Tory. After all Scots don't like even Scottish Tories. And Cameron's very Scottish name doesn't seem to help him.

[img] [/img]

fasternotfatter - Member
Hey duckman I am merely pointing out the casually racist attitude displayed by a lot of Scots towards English people.

Of course, that only works one way doesn't it? The English would never treat scots/welsh/Irish with disdain, would they?.

It does only work one way and that is because of the air of superiority that all English people have. On the other hand it could be a feeling of inferiority that some Scots feel around the English.

On the other hand it could be a feeling of inferiority that some Scots feel around the English.

I think you'll find that the real reason Scots don't like Cameron is because he is a Tory. After all Scots don't like even Scottish Tories. And Cameron's very Scottish name doesn't seem to help him.

Yup. It's not because he's English, it's not because of his accent, it's because he's a ****.

Slightly clunky statement konabunny, but I know what you mean

All the sassenachs living up there for starters

The majority of Scots are sassenachs

Sassenach means english so you are saying the majority of scots are english?

Sassenach means english so you are saying the majority of scots are english?

I think the majority are Polish nowadays.

fasternotfatter - Member
It does only work one way and that is because of the air of superiority that all English people have. On the other hand it could be a feeling of inferiority that some Scots feel around the English.

POSTED 5 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

Who said all English have an air of superiority then? It wasn't me. And in the same post that you said abuse only goes one way... 🙄

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/10792044/Alex-Salmond-I-admire-certain-aspects-of-Vladimir-Putins-leadership.html ]Oh (H)ECK![/url]

(Tannoy)- Teamhurtmore to the forum, THM to the forum!-(tannoy)

So it's true, UKiP and SNP leaders are the same.

Personally it's time we put this silly English and Scottish tiff to one side and got back to the burning issue that is Freedom for Yorkshire. This will of course include any who speaks Yorkshire but is unfortunately living outside the soon to be independent Yorkshire.

Sassenach means english so you are saying the majority of scots are english?

kona. I meant to say your question rather than statement. Was not attempting to imply anything, the question was valid, just using 'foreign' seemed a bit ambiguous. (Would this include Irish nationals for example).

Interesting hearing about the Salmond/Putin reports. Not sure exactly what he admires, and also the context, however the mainstream press has not made a big fuss it seems, with opposition critics saying his comments were simply ill advised and poorly timed.
Would be interesting to see how many would react if the shoe was on the other foot, and comments like that had come from Alastair Darling though.

It means lowlander/Anglophone, you pleb.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=sassenach+meaning&oq=sassenach+meaning&aqs=chrome..69i57.3348j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

It does not from any link I have seen nor do I know anyone who uses it as such Its route is the word Saxon hence the similarities between the gaelic, the irish word and the welsh word

Why do you think that it means anything other than English? I have never heard this - LINK or are you being sarcastic and about to claim you were joking?

From wiki

In the Celtic languages, the word for the English nationality is derived from the Latin Saxones. The most prominent example, a loan word in English, is the Gàidhlig Sassenach (Saxon), often used disparagingly in Scottish English/Scots. It derives from the Scottish Gaelic Sasunnach meaning, originally, "Saxon", from the Latin "Saxones". As employed by Scots or Scottish English-speakers today it is usually used in jest, as a (friendly) term of abuse. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) gives 1771 as the date of the earliest written use of the word in English.
Sasanach, the Irish language word for an Englishman, has the same derivation, as do the words used in Welsh to describe the English people (Saeson, sing. Sais) and the language and things English in general: Saesneg and Seisnig. These words are normally, however, used only in the Irish and Welsh languages themselves.
Cornish also terms English Sawsnek from the same derivation. In the 16th century, the phrase 'Meea navidna cowza sawzneck!' to feign ignorance of the English language was used in Cornish.[5]
England, in Gàidhlig, is Sasainn (Saxony). Other examples are the Welsh Saesneg (the English language), Irish Sasana (England), Breton saoz(on) (English, saozneg "the English language", Bro-saoz "England"), and Cornish Sowson (English people) and Sowsnek (English language), Pow Sows for 'Land [Pays] of Saxons'.

Not sure exactly what he admires

According to the linked article he admires Putin for having "restored national pride" and being "effective".

National pride is a fairly meaningless concept imo. Many Americans, for example, will proudly fly in the stars and stripes in their front gardens but it doesn't mean that they give a toss about their fellow Americans or the common good. National pride does not equate patriotism, although I can see the attraction for Salmond as he tries to appeal to meaningless petty nationalism.

I suspect what Salmond really admires with regards to Putin is his poll ratings.

Aye I think you have it there ernie
I have no idea WTF he meant it was bit like praising Hitler for unifying germany tbh
A proper foot in mouth moment by AS up there with his Iceland/Tiger economy speech

Why do you think that it means anything other than English? I have never heard this....

I've heard it said that it refers to a lowlander, although never an Anglophone.

I always understood it belonged to non Gaelic speaking Southerners,at one time from the Highlands down,who didn't follow the old ways e.g. the clan system.It was used in dispatches to describe the city council in Glasgow who refused to open the gates to Bonnie Prince Charlie's army by Donald McDonald, an islander. Last 20/30 years it is increasingly a description for the English as we are all English speakers up here now.

All the dictionaries say that sassanach means english. I do remember hearing the word used to mean a person from south of the highland line like Duckman I think the change in meaning is a fairly recent thing.
EDIT The different spellings prompted me to try the dictionary of the scots language which says

DSL - SND1 SASSENACH, adj., n. Also Sassanoch, -enagh, Sasennach, -unnach; the form in the 1706 quot. represents the Gael.pl. Sasunnaich. English, English-speaking, formerly also applied to the Lowlanders of Scotland; as a n., an Englishman or -woman. The word was orig. put in the mouths only of Highlanders but is now in somewhat jocular use throughout Scotland. [?s?s?n?x]
*Sc. 1706 Letters from E.C. to E.W. Concerning the Union 6:
We call them Sassanich, in Latin Saxi or Saxoni.
*Sc. 1737 J. Drummond Memoirs Locheill (1842) 113:
The English (or “Sassanoch”, that is, Saxons, as they call them in their language).
*Sc. 1771 Smollett Humphrey Clinker, Melford to Phillips (3 Sept.):
The Highlanders have no other name for the people of the Low country, but Sassenagh, or Saxons.

Given that the region that is now Lowland Scotland was settled quite extensively by the Saxon invaders in the C5th & C6th to the point that later Anglo-Saxon records describe the remaining pocket of non-Saxon lowlanders as the 'Strathclyde Welsh'* then the old meaning of the word does seem to be more accurate.

*Welsh is derived from Walesch, meaning foreigner/other in Old English i believe.

just using 'foreign' seemed a bit ambiguous

Meanwhile, I'm really enjoying being corrected by English people about what the correct definition of Scots words (used in this thread as an insult by an English person against English people). It's almost as much fun as when a bunch of Americans were telling me the kilt isn't a skirt and any true Scotsman would take offence to me saying so.

gordimhor - Member
All the dictionaries say that sassanach means english. I do remember hearing the word used to mean a person from south of the highland line like Duckman ...

That's what I was taught - south of the Highland line, so it included Lowlanders and English, basically non-Gaelic speakers, and not an insult.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/28/alex-salmond-fisheries-eu-scotland

I wonder if hell threaten to cut off the EUs oil supply next? Although he'd need to ignore Scottish waters actual oil production and the EUs oil consumption first. Maybe that's what he likes about Vlad, that he can turn the energy taps off?

Slightly different.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/eu-denies-alex-salmond-s-claim-over-living-wage-1-3391162

So you think that Scotland should still allow EU boats to fish Scottish waters even if we're kicked out of the EU?

Why on earth would we want to do that?

The article suggests he would attempt to bar access to Norwegian fisheries as well, blockading them.

Salmond didn't make any threats, that's just more of the same, an anti-Scottish media distorting what was actually said.

He just pointed out the bleeding obvious.

If we're not in the club, it can't expect any of our pie. After all, they wouldn't be sharing theirs with us.

The article suggests he would attempt to bar access to Norwegian fisheries as well, blockading them.

Yes, that is a bit daft.

It is funny how one sentence in a long speech got all the attention, though - the full speech is here:

http://news.scotland.gov.uk/Speeches-Briefings/Scotland-s-Place-in-Europe-bdf.aspx

Anyhow:

[i]Graham Avery, Honorary Director-General of the European Commission and Senior Adviser at the European Policy Centre in Brussels, says that for both political and practical reasons an independent Scotland could not be asked be asked to leave the EU.

In written evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee at Westminster, he states: "Scotland’s five million people, having been members of the EU for 40 years, have acquired rights as European citizens. For practical and political reasons they could not be asked to leave the EU and apply for readmission."

Mr Avery adds:
"If they [the Scottish people] wish to remain in the EU, they could hardly be asked to leave and then reapply for membership in the same way as the people of a non-member country such as Turkey. The point can be illustrated by considering another example: if a break-up of Belgium were agreed between Wallonia and Flanders, it is inconceivable that other EU members would require 11 million people to leave the EU and then reapply for membership."[/i]

We will not be continuing members of the EU,I think that it is pretty clear that rUK would keep the ticket...at least until they pull out 🙂

duckman - Member
We will not be continuing members of the EU,..

I suppose that depends on how international law views the split. Either as 2 sovereign nations dissolving a treaty, so you get 2 continuing entities, or as a territory peeling off in which case one is the continuing state. I don't know the answer to this, but there's been plenty of opinion published supporting the former in overseas publications.

But it doesn't really matter which it is, because Scotland will be in the EU and without fuss.

then the old meaning of the word does seem to be more accurate.

FWIW anti-semitism is another one as it means anti - Jew. however the semites are the children of seth and also include the Arabs[ and others] but i would expect most folk to use it for what it means now rather than what semite actually/historically meant/means.
Words change but as I said the info was new to me.

I'm really enjoying being corrected by English people about what the correct definition of Scots words

We will not be continuing members of the EU

I am sure that the fishermen of the NE coast would not be too upset if it took a while to hammer out EU membership. As you have said, there will be a lot horse trading in the event of a yes vote.

the country would not be but the people may well be depending on how much they wish to fudge it

so no citizen of the member states is an EU citizen then because only states are in the EU??
That is nonsense
I think you mean the states sign the treaties of the EU that then confer rights on the citizens. as is the way in a representative democracy.
Clearly citizens of member states are EU citizens so "in" the EU. Its why we can exercise our right to live there for example.

I dont think its a great argument but I dont see how you can argue that Scottish citizens are not in the EU - check out the passport it even says it

Did someone say Scotland will be culturally weakened by a Yes vote?

Don't follow.

I'd have thought all those who consider Scotland to be subsidy junkies and anti-English would be supportive of a Yes vote seeing as you'd get rid of us yet the sentiment on here seems to be very aggressively against Yes. Lots of portrayal of Yes support as petty nationalism.

Petty nationalism exists everywhere but if you lived up here and were privy to the constant negativity and sanctimony which has been pushed down everyone's throat by the press and BBC Scotland then you'd perhaps understand why support for Yes is rising the closer we get to the vote.

Don't even get me started on Better Together. They are a disgrace.

As for arguing over who is more racist or what the true definition of Sassenach is - get a life.

I will vote Yes because I want a different system of governance. We are voting for Devo Max in all but name. Alex Salmond in my opinion has been very shrewd with his stance on independence. What he proposes is Devo Max. Westminster vetoed devo max because they are not interested in devolving any more powers to other regions of the UK. Cameron said in his speech at the Scottish Conservative conference "a No vote COULD mean more devolved powers for Scotland" Could mean? either it will or it won't and it's abundantly clear it won't.

One thing I am sure of is that New Labour are ****ED in Scotland regardless of what way the vote goes and that will be of some consolation if a No vote is returned.

Clearly citizens of member states are EU citizens so "in" the EU.

Grantus, your one of these undecided voters aren't you.

Anyway, I think some folk underestimate the depth of the UKOCK campaigns support. The offices next door have pro union stuff on their Windows and cars. Just next to the Conservative MPS signs admittedly.