"Untied" Kingdom?

My Recent Posts

There might well always be an England but there might not always be a United Kingdom - "Untied" Kingdom more like. Disintegration is now happening before our eyes whilst Scotland is trying to remain in the EU.


As there are no clear leaders emerging, given that Boris the buffoon and Lord of Misrule has gone to ground and Nigel Farrage aka Punch can go back to his puppet box for a while (whilst allowing overt racism to run riot on the streets), the ruling parties are disintegrating.


The Labour party has not represented its people for a long time; 1997 and Tony Blair - he was not and never has been a Labour person. He was a career politician, and, along with the Kinnocks, the Harmans, the Prestcotts and others, made their own lives very rich, titled and powerful and did absolutely nothing about a coherent and inclusive social policy, including housing and neighbourhood building. The Politocracy grew out of its own, huge, egos. Just who does Hillary Ben think that he is to decide on a leader, when he has done nothing other than live in the context of the Politocracy his whole life? He is not thinking about a leader for the people, he is thinking about a leader for his own ship - the one that is turned in on itself and functioning only for itself.

They left the masses to live in degenerate housing "sinks" of poverty, lack of education and in a crumbling infrastructure of medical services, school play grounds and more, when, in 1997 a clear housing and social policy was needed. Between the politicians and the press (they feed each other) the political elite is now populating the government which, as an entity in itself, serves nothing but itself; i.e.: the original cause (representation at ground level) has long, long gone.


The fundamental questions have not been asked since 1997 and yet, when Ed Milliband recently lost the election and leadership, it was seemingly still not apparent to the Labour party that he was and they are, so totally out of touch with the people he was supposed to represent. The disenfranchised have no relationship or point of reference with their "elected" MPs. They voted "out" as a protest against the Establishment which has ignored them and made them much, much poorer. Lack of housing, let alone good housing, is causing frictions at ground level and feeding nationalistic and racistic feelings.


Labour blame the Conservatives but it is the Labour party who are directly to blame for this current state of affairs. The last straw was that the Conservatives have taken away benefits from the weakest and poorest in society, whilst making the rich, richer. No wonder that the square mile of London wants to be declared as an independent state and stay in the EU - this one square mile is as far as the elite get.


Let us hope that Jeremy Corbyn gets support from the masses now, because his own "Labour" cabinet is still living in the delusion that they are worthy of office. In a land where the word-acronym "chav" is now included in the English dictionary, just what did we really expect to happen?


Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 28, 2016 - 3:11pm
Speaker of Truth: "whose truth?" Just kidding!  I have not written about whether a referendum is legal or the right thing to do; I have merely written about what I believe is the originating cause of the recent Brexit vote.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 28, 2016 - 3:14pm
MJ, thank you. I am not sure that a referendum was the right way to go. It was certainly indicative that the government did underestimate the power of the disenfranchised. Unfortunately, the media and ukip have promoted immigration and lack of infrastructure (to cope with this) as the real problems for the past decade and, sadly, no politicians nor journalists have done enough to write the truth: the problem is not immigration, but the problem is that no social policy has constructively existed since 1978 and we are today reaping what was sown then.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 28, 2016 - 3:18pm
Michael Loffe, thank you for your commentary. You are looking at things in a very much wider perspective and in terms of the human condition. It is right to do so, of course.
The direct cause of the Brexit issue, however, about which I was specifically writing, is due to a very outdated parliamentary system wherein we have too many MPs enjoying a very good living out of the ignorance of the masses. It has not been in the interests of mainstream political parties to deal with social issues; keeping the masses ignorant of the truth has kept them in power and in control. It is a very sad legacy, but this has to end and Britain must now look within and deal with its own prejudices.
Greg Sturmer Added Jun 29, 2016 - 2:04pm
A lot of nonsense being spouted by people that were not actually campaigning. It will be very good if Scotland and Ireland decide what they want for their own people and end their issues for the next generation.  England and Wales have made their final decision by a landslide majority.

Scotland now has a decision to make and most normal English people do not make the "Obama" mistake of trying to tell them what to do.

We simply say they have to make the same decision that we had to make.

You will be poorer if you Leave (because England sends around USD 2600 per person each year to Scotland) but you will have self- determination.  It really is a matter for the Scots to decide by themselves. 

It will be very telling to see which they really prefer.

Mark Klaers Added Jun 29, 2016 - 3:09pm
SOT, why should people in the South, Midwest and Southwest of the US be made to suffer under the edicts of the "Boy King"? A far narrower majority returned him to power here.
Mark Klaers Added Jun 29, 2016 - 5:17pm
Sorry SOT, I should've dumbed down the analogy. I was referring to an independent minded majority voting its mind. The same reason Scotland and Ireland have to follow along is the same reason Montana and Arizona have to obey our Dear Leader.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 30, 2016 - 5:00am
Hello Joanna Nutile: for any developed country - especially in the G8 group - not having a coherent infrastructure policy, which includes housing and transportation, is indicative of ignoring the social facets of a country. People have to live somewhere and that is not just housing, but it is about neighbourhoods and facilities. Margaret Thatcher left everything to the free market - including the financial sector - to allow people to "police themselves" and that led to the 2008 financial crash. She also sold off the UK's assets, even gave some away, then deliberately prevented any maintenance of what was left. This led to social decline and, ultimately, it all comes back to the tax payer and the poor to pay the price. Today's situation is reaping all of what was sown then. The great betrayal, however, has come from the "Labour" party, because they had the opportunity to turn the tide, from 1997 onwards. But they patently did not do so.
Bill Kamps Added Jun 30, 2016 - 10:24am
SOT - exactly right.  Referendum's are not a replacement for good government.  Good government allows for compromise, while a referendum is a black or white solution.  This decision which may have significant consequences, was decided by a few percentage points difference, which is not how a democracy should function.
Eileen, MOST Western governments have ignored their responsibilities to govern on many facits, and this is part of the reason for the Brexit.  Yes it was a protest vote against government, just like Bernie and Trump are protest votes in the USA.  These would not be happening if the political elite were actually doing their jobs, instead of figuring out how to line their pockets, give themselves perks, and stay in power.
Greg Sturmer Added Jun 30, 2016 - 1:53pm
Bill , SOT failed miserably to explain the logical flaw in the arguments about the 2016 referendum validity.  May be you can fair better?

If a referendum in 1975 took us into the EEC and a Referendum in 2016 took us out of the EU how can you argue that the relevance of referendums is of any merit.

If they are not valid, both are not valid and we are OUT. And if they are valid they are both valid and we are OUT. 

The referendum validity argument is thus a complete red herring. A total logical nonsense in the current case.

Furthermore it was not, as some hopeful EU groupies claim, a protest vote, it was an Identity and sovereignty vote, as was shown by the old Celtic Kingdoms showing a different Identity to Tutor England.  The truth that no one wishes to face up to is that they are different peoples and they deserve their shot at independence.
I do agree that if we had had half decent politicians the whole transition could have been handled better, but I doubt anyone can resolve the reality of a kingdom divided for hundreds of years and patched over with power or cash.

There is no possible gain in attempting to prop up a Great Britain that fell apart years ago, or belonging to some massive sluggish EU Armada that will be sunk by the first storm.

There is much however to be gained from a fleet of small fast independent nations acting in concert and mutual respect.

Bill Kamps Added Jul 1, 2016 - 7:54am
Greg,  I was commenting a bit more on referendum's in general and I think SOT was as well.  We have them on the ballot here pretty often, for various things of less consequence certainly than what the UK faced with their recent vote.  I am not an expert on UK politics and policies so perhaps in this case it was unavoidable.
The problem with referendums is that they  are yes or no, black and white votes , when often a compromise is the better solution.  That is what we elect officials for, to reach reasonable compromises that avoid dire consequences.  In some cases neither the yes or no, is a very good solution, and often times it is difficult to fully understand the consequences of either side by the average voter, so you invite in emotional responses.
It is really the terms of staying or leaving that are the issue.  If there were decent politicians involved, more flexibility could have been achieved to allow the UK to stay in, or make the  transition to leaving less dire.  Even with the UK in the EU it was a bit of a compromise since the UK was not using the  Euro, so perhaps other compromises could have been achieved that would allow the  UK to stay in.  Since the population was pretty evenly divided it probably would not have taken much compromise to swing the preference in terms of staying.
Simply ending the EU relationship, without putting other trade agreements in place, or other replacement regulations in place, creates a mess of uncertainty, which is what the financial markets are responding to.  To end one relationship without  a replacement, which eventually will have to be crafted, is pretty unwise. 
Mircea Negres Added Jul 1, 2016 - 8:36am
People get the government they deserve, although in the case of Britain, politicians have almost exclusively served the interests of the power elite. I stand to be corrected, but from what I know, the biggest owner of property in London (including the City) is a Duke related to HM the Queen. I'm sure if anybody tried to have the City declared independent from the UK armed troops would be there within the hour and the Pierrepoint family will once again perform a certain service for the Crown, although I'm sure the price per head would have gone up since the 1950s...
As for the EU, it may have been a nice idea on paper, but it had as much a chance of success as the Roman, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, British and French empires have had. To me it was always a pipe dream which the Germans encouraged because it gave them a chance to do with money and politics what they couldn't do with force until 1945, and given the many nationalities and cultures involved in this grand social misadventure, it's a miracle it has lasted as long as it did. Look, the EU's fall is inevitable. What can be avoided however, is most of the economic and political fallout from its failure IF the people and governments concerned get off their mental butts and start planning NOW for what's to come.
I say this because in the aftermath of the British vote to exit the EU it became very clear to me that neither political nor commercial entities had bothered to consider, let alone plan for such an eventuality and the newspapers were full of pompous bull that tried to disguise the fact that no analyst knew what was going to happen next. If to secure the peace one must prepare for war (Si vis pacem para bellum- the Royal Navy's motto by the way), then to secure success one must prepare for failure.
As such, I'm gonna call it- England's politicians will have 5-10 years ahead of them in which The Establishment will actually be earning their pay through the sheer number of pieces of legislation that will need deactivating and new treaties to be negotiated and signed. The British economy will go through a period of uncertainty because the formalities of international investment will need to be firmed up and there will likely be an increase in unemployment. In that time, new deals will be brokered, fortunes made and lost, and it's up to the ordinary Briton to stop looking at the nanny state for a hand out and rather give themselves a hand up in order to survive and even prosper. Until then, them times will surely be interesting.
Mircea Negres Added Jul 1, 2016 - 1:57pm
Thanks for backing me up, MJ. I think this is a good time to be a lawyer specializing in international law, mercantile law and such related fields in the UK, because for sure people will need better legal advice than our joke of a president said he got regarding Nkaaaandlaaaa, and will pay more than Adv. Hulley got for First World wisdom and "service".
About the Greeks, here's a story I got from a Greek woman I know. When Greece nearly went under, the government started looking at cutting costs. The bean counters then found a town in which everybody was blind. Surprised, they sent people to investigate and it turned out the residents had themselves declared blind fraudulently in order to collect benefits and nobody spotted it until then. A Greek politician said at least 2.000 years ago that democracy (and hence the state) will fail when the citizens pay themselves more and more out of the public kitty. It seems to me that bit of wisdom was proved right not just by ordinary Greeks' greed, but also the ancient wisdom of their people which as usual, government employees didn't bother to think about until it became too late...
Mircea Negres Added Jul 1, 2016 - 4:51pm
Speaker of Truth, the European Union most people think about assumes a homogeneity of mindsets which has not and does not exist. Just beneath the surface of almost every East European mind is a dark monster that scared the daylights out of the SS and the German people from the end of World War 2 until 1989. It is a monster of the dark side of freedom motivated by anger at centuries of foreign domination and which resents not just the EU parliament's policies, but German economic supremacy, because both put together remind them too much of rule imposed by the Austro-Hungarians and Ottomans. That's why I said the EU was at best a pipe dream doomed to failure, besides the threat of one country's economic failure on the rest of the union, which in Greece's case almost proved catastrophic for a number of reasons, Greek fraud and Goldman Sachs avarice notwithstanding. Once again, there are just too many peoples with too disparate philosophies to make the European Union work for much longer than the next 10 years, and the continent's last 2000 years of history bears me out.
Mircea Negres Added Jul 2, 2016 - 5:28am
Speaker of Truth:
Despite appearances and other people's assumptions, I'm a realist, not a pessimist. Do I want the EU to work? Of course. If it does and the situation improves it will mean that the average Romanian's state pension will rise above the 200 or so euros a month they currently get and life will become more bearable for my relatives who try to survive on the meager benefits they get and the European prices they have to pay for goods. It will hopefully mean workers at the Renault factory there will earn as much as their French counterparts for doing the same work, instead of the 10th of that they earn from what I've been told.
As for the hatred East Europeans have for outside interference in their affairs, you need to understand those people know and place far more importance on their history than West Europeans. This is partly why the Balkans War was so savage and East European countries like Albania, Macedonia, Hungary and Romania are so little inclined to help the refugees from Syria and Libya, to the point that Hungary has fenced off its Eastern border. You see, not only are they economically unable to help those poor wretches escaping ISIS, but they also use it as a means to get some revenge for Muslim invasions of the past, if they're not actually thinking their actions prevent the possibility of another one occurring.
As for the Scots, Irish and others currently living more or less peacefully alongside their former conquerors, please bear in mind the Scots have always resented British domination and tried to assert every little bit of independence in foreign relations, even going so far as to attempt to exit the United Kingdom recently. That referendum was defeated by a very slim margin, so there's still a chance that one day they'll secede.
The Irish are not that different either, having fought against British domination until the late 20th century. In their case, it took a great deal of English use of "divide and rule" tactics along with use of military force to prevent the secession of Northern Ireland from the UK, but the undercurrent of nationalism is still flowing through their minds to this day, so your example is unfortunately flawed because given no British interference to maintain supremacy, both peoples would declare independence from Britain in a heartbeat if they could find a framework to guarantee the rights and liberties of those more bent towards England, the Irish Protestants being first that come to mind.
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 2, 2016 - 5:54am

I take your point. From the outside it does seem rash. And I have never said it will not be turbulent.  

But if we were worried about turbulence we would never have learned how to fly.  

Have no fear the UK is about to learn to fly. We will fall a few times, we will scuff our knees a few times and yes we may even break a few necks, but in the end we will soar.  

In the EU our growth rate was the lowest of any continent in the world except Antartica. 

The problem was that a negotiation and a discussion about reform of the EU failed. To compound the issue Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty was an after thought when some bright spark asked how a country could exit.  Believe it or not no one had ever asked the question before. A fact that shows the mindset.

In short, what I am saying is that there was no simple, peaceful and rational way to leave quietly.  We could not simply resign from the club an expect a managed transition.

There is a clause that no EU country can negotiate trade with another and hence a Catch 22 is established where the UK is still in the EU for two years hence all other EU countries are legally prohibited from negotiations with us. Like the Dublin Agreement and Schengen, many laws in 2015 was ignored by Berlin so I expect them to continue in that vein and protect their car industry by doing a deal.

But even if they don't it is obvious that the taxpayers that actually contribute to the EU should be listened to. The taxpayers for contributing areas of the UK rather than net beneficiaries, voted in massive majority around  60 / 40 in favour of leaving.

There really wasn't another way to do it and it is a bit rich that some people that are afraid of flying by the seat of their pants are now blaming the oppressed for the the failed laws of the oppressor. 
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 2, 2016 - 6:07am

I agree fully with your comments. I have noticed a distinct anti-English sentiment here from those that stand to lose the most as nations from the UK withdrawal.

It is an interesting dynamic that the depth of anger both at national and personal level is proportional to the likely consequence financially.

It does rather appear to me that those that would put a price on Liberty are indeed in need of a quick boat trip down the Thames and the services of the Pierrepoint family.

I for one have no problem with a fair day's pay for a far day's work for that family and feel it is a shame that people abroad cannot understand the actual decline in middle and working class wages in the last 10 years in the UK and the arrival of zero-hours contracts "Protected by the EU" 

It is crazy to see the militant Socialist Worker Party rent a mob working for the multi-national. It is a sight I never thought I would ever live to see and it is also a clear sign of the death throws of something truly evil.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jul 2, 2016 - 7:19am
Hello Mircea and Greg: being British includes the Scots, Irish, Welsh and the English. "English" as a legitimate nationality does not exist whereas the other three are legitimate nationalities. As an "English" person myself (and I wrote it on the last Census even though it was not "allowed") I come from both Scots and Irish roots (could even get an Irish passport, actually).
So, most of the English are an amalgamation of those British isles' peoples. To be British incorporates all. To "despise" the "English" is utterly anachronistic; the English have not benefited as much as the Scots, Welsh and Irish with social policies. All further education in England now has to be paid for, hospital car parks paid for whereas in Scotland and Wales, their policies are far more inclusive and suggest a more even distribution of wealth. England loses out all of the time and it is the "English" who generally get the worst "deal". 
The political elite has long abandoned the fundamentals of building a fairer society. Infrastructure has been neglected so that the means of managing a growing population including the requisite immigration is not in place. The political elite and the media have conveniently left out the facts and have allowed the scapegoat factor of "immigration" to remain for the masses, because it suits their divisive purpose. This being the elite in both the political and journalistic spheres existing for its own ends. 
Sadly, not realising that the fundamental economic argument of having a much larger middle class is a given, means that the recent occurrences of overt nationalism or racism have been given oxygen. Economically speaking, the larger the middle classes the better the economy so it is actually in a country's interests to feed the economics' policies in government and it should have persuaded them to educate the masses instead of deliberately creating ignorance. But it is not the country that the political elite are bothered about; it is only their own ivory towers and their own wealth and their own dynasties. The real issue is the narrow political and journalistic elite. Have you seen the BBC news' programmes lately? They are so dumbed down it reminds me of "Watch With Mother" programmes when I was a child in the sixties! The newscasters talk down to the viewers and make it all rather easy to understand, but what they do not do is present the true facts: that immigration is not the real issue, but that the very badly managed country specifically since 1978 and more recently from 1995 under a "socialist" government, is the key issue - only by tackling this can things change in a constructive and value-added way - and this will take both honesty and time.
Because we have no proportional representation, there is no modern yet desperately needed economic and social balance in the UK. The system itself has long outgrown its country's needs but it serves very well the needs and desires of parliamentary members who can strut their stuff. The country needs balanced people - like the Liberals and like real Labour - to manage it through the modern world. What we are facing today, is the fact that the UK is now going to be more inward looking and it will not serve any good purpose in its world standing. Empires indeed ultimately implode - they rest on their laurels and that is the demise - perhaps Boris would be a good cartoon character to imitate "Nero" playing his fiddle, whilst the UK burns.
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 2, 2016 - 4:32pm
I enjoyed your post. And think that you may agree that a resurgent English will be attacked and called names by everyone that fears them. I agree with you 100% that an Irishman with a flag is called a Patriot but an Englishman with a flag is called a racist bigot. This will end only when we stop listening to the bias of frightened children.  Imagine Americans unable to salute their flag? Its crazy.

But with friends like SOT, who on earth would need enemies. I guess he forgot the 300 Billion pounds paid into the EU by the UK? Or the 2000 year history of the city of London.  He also forgot very conveniently the attempts over the years by the UK to reform the EU. And of course no mention that the EU has not passed a financial audit in 20 years.  In short he is a brain washed bigot that hates the English and is wishing and hoping for their demise. He will be sadly disappointed.

I wonder where he thinks the UK's friends were during the recent attempt at renegotiation.  They humiliated our PM and sent him home with nothing. They may regret that decision. It was crass and stupid.
Now SOT thinks our so called friends are going to punish us? Well it's better not to have friends like that if they do, and in any case they will have to think very carefully about how the UK might respond.

SOT has a Phd but he is incapable to explain or understand why the reality in the markets at the moment is entirely at odds with his predictions.  He simply cannot explain why the UK stocks are up and European stocks are down. 

I will help him. Austria France Greece Spain Italy and Portugal. Plus  Germany. Each has real issues with either their economy, debt levels or a popularist sentiment against the EU. The EU is in real trouble because it has failed to reform. It has brought everything on itself.

As for Reaganomics I will leave it to the Americans here to decide who actually ended the cold war.

Was it a bitter, small minded, Irishman sitting in Vancouver........

or a genuinely special relationship between two sovereign nations that convinced a third, that peace and prosperity was possible?

If that is a failure I hope we fail as badly. 

The EU is an economic disaster zone. SOT is a bitter soul who  cannot even mention one positive comparison with anywhere or any time in history where over regulation brought economic prosperity. 

So like the commissars under Stalin he resorts to blame, insults and fantasy predictions of doom. 
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 2, 2016 - 4:40pm
Yawn.  Answer the UK verses European Stock market question. Oh wise genius of economics?
Stone-Eater Added Jul 3, 2016 - 6:58am
Welcome here and thanks for that from Switzerland :-)
You are right. People haven't realized that the original idealistic idea of a united Europe would become a controlling giant ruled indirectly by the US economy.
We Swiss knew why we didn't join that club (although we have to adopt a lot of these useless rules). You can peacefully live together on agreements like the former EEC, that way individual cultural and systemic specialities are guaranteed. A Finn is not a Greek is not a Portuguese ;-)
The idea of the EU is dead. Cancel the whole stuff and go back to individual control of YOUR country. That's more compromising in the near future.
Stone-Eater Added Jul 3, 2016 - 7:01am
It is tiring. Please focus on the subject !
Stone-Eater Added Jul 3, 2016 - 7:02am
BTW: I like Corbyn. As I like Bernie in the US. But who knows nowadays who is authentic and who is not.....
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 3, 2016 - 8:59am
SOT you simply don't answer the questions posed.  The Markets are fed by people with far higher economic information, experience and incentive collectively than any one individual here.  They represent sentiment. The sentiment says you are 100% wrong in each and every aspect of your analysis of the future.

You also keep up the false hope of my ignorance of everything. But I wonder if the readers can figure out which of the the two of us has been the CEO of a European Government owned company reporting directly to a Minister of Finance of an accession country to the EU? And which went to university but learnt nothing useful?
Shame you can't see no one is buying your nonsense and everyone can see the anti-english sentiments that blind you to the reality that the EU is a failed structure, that is incapable of reform, whose days are numbered.  

When it fails, in exactly he same way and for exactly the same reasons that the USSR failed and Yugoslavia failed and every false country throughout history fails then every single point you make will be proved false.
Few people have the capability to be 100% wrong on every point they make, so for that at least I salute you in the same manner as English archers leaving the field. 

Stone-Eater Added Jul 3, 2016 - 9:11am
your arguments are subjective - I tend to the opinion that the EU is NO GOOD for us - and it was never planned to be good for the ... population.
I repeat: A Finn is not a Greek and not a Portuguese !
Let PEOPLE decide and not cartels. We can discuss the "history of written language" after :-) *hint*
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 3, 2016 - 9:37am
Hi Stone

I rather feel I am yet to have an argument, as any real questions are never answered by Speaker of Truth (SOT) with anything more than irrelevant twoddle.

I do however agree with you that my arguments are subjective, as they quiet clearly have a subject unlike the ramblings of the aforementioned speaker.  

But I think you hit the nail on the head in pointing out that an Englishman might have a differentiated position and opinion on many matters from a Swiss or a Norwegian. And it is surely their right under UN Charter Article 1 point 2 to decide those matters for themselves.

Small minded leftish bigots utterly and deliberately confuse the philosophical belief that a self determined Nation State for every country and its people is the right structure of governance; with Nationalism which is the believe in a particular Nation state being better or more valuable than another.

They are not the same thing and the argument that they are, is a particularly prevalent and nasty piece of propaganda for  the unelected technocrats.
Eileen correctly identified that when an English person speaks out for the right of national self determination, they are more likely to be called a Nationalist than listened to.  Those of us that campaigned to leave the EU and won are complete bored with the insults, aggression and labels.

Those that opposed us have most likely never read the UN Charter so I will enclose it here in the hope that the true supporters of the Union of Soviet and Socialist European nations understand the argument was never about race. It was about Liberty. And that is why we won.

The UN Charter Article 1 Point 2 
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 3, 2016 - 4:54pm
Speaker of Rubbish. Read the UN Charter. There's a good chap.
Article 1 Point 2.

I am very happy for every country including Scotland and Ireland to have the same rights. Obvious like many other bigots you feel the only country with no rights is England.
Your despotic tendencies are not shared by very many. I for example have no interest in holding Scotland in a Union against their will. The problem is that they voted to stay. I guess that is just one more plebiscite you wish to ignore.  In any case on the day they wish to leave they should be allowed to do so.

Your whole argument on the Scottish identity is a complete nonsense if you do not allow the English the same freedoms and respect. Unfortunately you are blinded to your own hopelessly lost logic.

As for the economics of an Independent Scotland oh my are you a country mile away from reason, or fact or even sanity.
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 3, 2016 - 4:56pm
As for my roots, I assume most people here will realise the rank stupidity of calling an Anglo-Saxon a cross between English and German. Who would have guessed that?
Greg Sturmer Added Jul 3, 2016 - 5:04pm
And finally you may also have realised that I am not in the minority in believing that the UK is better off leaving the EU. There was I believe a vote that may have slipped your notice.  Since when did the rest of the world get to decide the future of the UK? 

You really are a bit of an arrogant fool.

Maybe you would support the English running Ireland again? Seems a far better idea than leaving it up to a collapsing EU in Brussels. That just gave next year's budget to France to try and stop the rot.

When they do collapse, perhaps, since you obviously don't want to run your country for yourselves you mind terribly if the English have another go?

Greg Sturmer Added Jul 3, 2016 - 5:24pm
Then don't its really easy just shut up. Top lip, down bottom lip up. And whilst you there try not breathing for  five or six minutes. No need to waste the oxygen.
John Minehan Added Jul 12, 2016 - 6:37pm
In my opinion, a nation has a right to leave a confederation if they so choose.
In my opinion, not everything was thought through with BREXIT, such as: the fact that a yes vote might cause Scotland (and possibly Ulster) to leave (if a nation can leave a confederation, then a nation can leave a confederation); some of the immigration that BREXIT voters have problems with is a function of the Commonwealth and NOT the EU; and a lot of the promises made to BREXIT voters are stunningly hollow.
People have a right to leave but they may not be best served to exercise that right.
The EU is a "soup sandwich," but it is a "soup sandwich" you know versus a lot of other issues you don't.