Nobody knows..not even the EU. The situation would be a first, so there is no precedent, and there are no rules. If there were, nobody would be arguing about it, would they? Bear in mind, that the rUK may well have to reapply as well, because the UK joined including Scotland's resources as a part of the package..most particularly their North Sea fishing waters...so, as the rUK will not be the country which joined either, and have less resources than they used to have without Scotland... logic says if one does not have automatic admittance, neither will.
Simple. London & Prague. Pride. Pride has always been switching between regions of the world, depending on the eras that made those regions benefit and shine a bit, with the more luckily extended good periods making people think it's forever. This made the overall world grow in slow motion, only to later, rather after centuries, have them admit that they abolish what they've been believing for so long in and are sorry about it but too late...at an evolutional price that limited all the planet. It <pride> made all collapse and rise in a stupid cycle of nobody learning anything because forgetting it as soon as better times came back. Today it's different. We have safe promising ways to store knowledge, information and all, young and old alike have access to everything. It seems the more the pride of Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Vienna, Rome, Luxembourg decreases, the more that in Prague and London increases. But it doesn't surprise me. In any group there has to be a Judas who betrays his brothers {at hard times [of incertitude(in his perception)]}.
But then how about some of the English EU citizens? Maybe they didn't want this to happen and now they find themselves stripped of their EU citizen rights because another nation decided so... QUite tricky!
Oddquine You seem to have changed a lot since two weeks ago when you responded to my poll asking: Europe's future is the EU becoming a federal team of unique nations. You responded with NEVER! back then... Now you made progress. You seem a don't know/don't care. Soon you will be yes. I just wonder how much longer will it take you. I think not much, you seem to change fast. My congratulations.
Let's go back to your original post on this Now you have been answered several times but you ignore anything that is said with one wish repeated forever. You claim and ask me if I am aware that he had said that Scotland would get automatic membership if she goes for independence? I first would like you to give me your reference for him saying "yeah yeah, no worries, we'll get automatic EU membership, job's a good 'un" because the reality is I have not heard him say this. Indeed I thought we were going to vote on whether we wanted membership after Independence! Now, forgive the source but this I think is what you are wrongly interpreting to be him saying we will join Europe automatically http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...EU-and-lose-UKs-opt-out-after-separation.html Now if I remember correctly this was on the Paxman interview and he sort of answered it and was immediately interrupted with this assumption being made without allowing him to continue what he was saying. TBH having listened to Newsnight last night, the legal experts did indeed think that was the more likely outcome given the reasons I have previously given. So no, I have not heard Salmond saying we would join the EU automatically. On this one he seems innocent. You need to be aware we are at the moment involved in the propaganda build up to the Independence vote which is going to come heartily from Unionists. You need to look yourself and clarify where the truth is. As I already said, on this issue we should now know the truth well before the vote and make plans accordingly.
[/QUOTE] As i said previously, the English people will throw off the degenerates regardless of my likes or dislikes of your aristocracy! As I said .... again ...... in a democracy ..... something totally missing in your part of your country, you talk, then talk again, and allow everyone to talk, regardless of colour or creed, and you come to a democratic decision. You inform the nation of your findings and allow a breathing space to vote on a serious question and referendum, and thats what the political system has done! You might even learn something. But I doubt it! I notice also you haven't mentioned the degenerate spoken about previously! The one that has executive powers and is above the law ....... the foreigner who supplanted even basic laws in all nation states. I wouldn't consider myself a socialist but I would call myself a humanist! I care about other human beings regardless of colour or creed. And I do care and have pity for what going to happen to those English people in England considering the corruption and basic inhumanity to English people by your french / german parasitic aristocracy. Never again the status quo ....... we the Scottish nation have a choice ........ you don't and never will! But again, they do say the sun shines on the righteous!! Have a nice day, and when the time comes for the parting of the ways ...... I would still consider you needing the same as I would want for my family and nation. Your energy will be required, when you realise that the parasites are not north of the border, but in and around your society sucking the nations life's blood and contributing nothing but putrid corruption! Regards and commiserations Highlander
My point is simple: Salmond has been leading the Scotish public to believe it was automatic. He's been purposefully lying; be careful who you trust in these debates.
Wait and see, If England cannot get loose from the ECB /IMF bondage, what hope of Scotland ....... But perhaps we might be lucky! Regards Highlander
From what I remember Oddquine has been an SNP member since before cows came home. I am sure she has ample knowledge and ability to come to her own conclusions.
Here's Barroso's statement making it clear: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=qZvYldSVhb8&feature=endscreen He said it's a legal problem... LEGAL. Sounds like 'just a formality' ... that 'will not get in the way of our common will', as if the will of the EU is nothing else than to have Scotland asap. I think the matter is more like irrelevant. What much difference does it make since it's obvious Scotland will be accepted very soon after it applies.
I voted 'yes'. It'll save England a fortune in social security payments and alcohol rehab centre funding.
But that works both ways........if we don't vote for Independence and the winners of the next UK election can be persuaded to hold a UK wide referendum as to leaving the EU, as UKIP and other anti-EU pressure groups are continually trying to instigate......even if Scotland votes to stay in by a big majority, we will have to come out with the rest of the UK, like it or lump it. So explain to me why we should worry that, just possibly, we might strip English citizens of their EU citizen rights, when they would have no problem doing the same to us if an English majority votes to come out, and all other UK countries vote to stay in?
Absolutely not.....believe me! You aren't reading my posts right (or I haven't made myself clear.) Why would you think that a post against globalisation as a political construct gathering in and controlling the gathered in members is a post in favour of a similar EU political construct which is becoming larger, more unwieldy and less European annually. I see no need for globalisation as in a one world Government or even with two, three or four alliances in various areas which become mini-countries like the USA, and become so intertwined that the countries involved lose sovereignty to the politicians of the countries with the biggest representation and most clout.
Do you think that, because some Unionists believe what the media says, all supporters of Independence.......or even many Unionists do? Do you think the Scottish public's heads button up the back? Anyway, what do you mean by automatic? He is highly unlikely to have said that admittance to the EU was automatic, given he and Scottish government ministers hav always said that Scotland would not require entry as Scotland, along with the rUK, is already a member of the EU. So, out of interest, how can you "lie" when there is nothing to lie about? You can only produce an intentionally false statement if there is something on record which makes that statement deliberately untrue. You can only lie about membership prospects of Scotland (or the rUK) of the EU when you know the criteria required, and the EU itself has not even considered that as yet. Anything either side says up until the EU speaks definitively is not lies.......but wishful thinking....much on the same lines as the Unionist "lies" that Scotland will have to reapply and the rUK will take over the UK membership automatically.....or Spain will veto any application by Scotland...or even the lie (and a deliberate one, at that) which prompted the citing of a letter by Barrosso in support of the Unionist POV which had not actually been written, far less sent and read!
Who said it doesn't? I made no statement you should worry about anything. It was just in theory, as I was trying to work out the reasoning behind EU's position. You said the UK might have to reapply too. The clear answer from Barroso is that the remains of the UK will remain a member and it makes sense. You have his answer at precisely 3:00: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=qZvYldSVhb8&feature=endscreen It makes sense because again it is the Scots not the English who did this. And you can't look at it the other way around like you say because it is only England who had an official capital at the time of the 1973 agreement and the Scots who had their Scottish sovereignty combined with the English one are supposed to have accepted that agreement implicitly. It is only them who break away from the agreement now. So in raw terms if UK votes to be out of EU it is as if they too (the Scots) accepted that because they are one with all the UK. In order to be able to disagree they first have to be independent If England votes for the UK to get out of the EU, then the Scots, in math, are just English who oppose an exit from the EU ;P The Scots had no capital as of 1973 and it somehow is implicit that they had accepted to have decisions taken by/mixed with the English ones since further back in history. So unfortunately the situation does not comfort them but it ain't a real disadvantage. Scotland will be accepted as soon as it is legally possible.
The people of Scotland are currently citizens of the EU. Does it seriously plan to expel them to please the likes of Cameron? It hardly seems a sane position, surely?
I know what post you're talking about and yes, this is exactly what you said there. But then came the unexpected SURPRISE: ................... ...................... ................... ......................
And regarding globalization... The EU never said it sees a need for it but rather that it is pushed, forced by it in one direction. It is all 7 bn humans and their behavior who make globalization grow and grow relentlessly and an organization like the EU can only listen to the people's tendencies and act accordingly... Otherwise it only then would be undemocratic because it would mean it doesn't listen to how people change.
Let's be honest, here....gobalisation, or even simply enlargement of influence and control, has nothing to do with "joe punter", whatever their race, creed or country....but it has everything to do with the political classes and the businesses who can see big buck profits arising from spreading their tentacles far and wide. The EU wasn't "pushed" by anybody or anything..as soon as it got an official existence as the original trading set-up.like Topsy, it just growed and growed........and continues to grow. Ted Heath didn't take the UK into the EEC because the public asked him to do that. Scottish fishermen didn't ask Ted Heath to sell their industry down the river to ensure entry to the EEC. Ted Heath did it without asking any of us in the UK until it was a fait accompli .........and once we had started to accept membership as "normal", we got a referendum.....and by then we were feart to vote no...just in case (or most of us were feart to vote no!).....not a lot different to the "better the devil you know" reasoning behind a lot of the likely No voters at the referendum going by the posts all over the place.
And Barrosso is the EU dictator is he....and what he says goes? If the EU has a position yet......it has not made a statement to that effect...or delineated that position. Actually, it is the UNION which did this...as in put the Scots in a situation in which Independence was not just the ambition of a few, but a possibility for all, due to the actions of successive Westminster Governments at least since 1970 which changed the UK so much and Scotland not enough. Excuse me, there are four countries in the Union, therefore four capital cities within it........it just so happens that London is the UK Capital as well as that of England.... that fact did not either demolish all the other countries' capital cities or make us forget they exist , so what it has to do with anything I fail to understand.
How you can interpret my opinion that Scotland in the EU is the least bad of the only three alliance options I considered, (because they are the only ones relating to the current situation and argument), worse would be being part of the UK and the worst would be being part of the UK within the EU as my coming round to anything. Which part of "I've said more than once, that I don't want to be in the EU at any price! " makes you think I am remotely pro-EU? I have also said more than once, that I want no part of the EU, will vote against membership when/if we get a referendum but will accept the decision of the majority and work to change opinion, even if I have to start a Scottish version of UKIP.
It actually is exactly the other way around. Globalization means all people of the world make the rules and shape the world... through the internet for example, through their great number and through their power of free voice, unrestricted subconscious feedback that the people give as a whole. They take back the influence from any form of organization. Even the biggest companies fail or succeed depending on the people's online decision that a product is good or not. In the past all companies and televisions were monopolistic and paternalistic - an outstanding example being Britain. Manipulation of the people by London may have increased in the last decades over all of you in the UK but that doesn't mean the rest of the world is like that.
