| Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites. |
| Luke P |
Northumbrian Independence - sorry.Hi. I am writing from the NPA, the Northumbrian people's alliance. We are a pressure group for Northumbrian independence. Northumbria was cruelly annexed by King Alfred about 1000 years ago and then partitioned with Scotland. We are angry and we want our 'FREEDOM' back. Our historic heartland runs from the Humber up to the Forth and our modern population is around 10 million. We are a proud race of mixed Brythonic Celt, Danish Angle and viking stock. Some of us share Scots and Pictish ancestry too. We have our own language (spoken by about 0.1% of us, but enough to warrant a few million in UK subsidies) and we have our own Northumbrian dialect which is very different to common English.Unfortunately we are going to also need back the Lothians and Edinburgh, historic capital of our region of Bernicia before Scottish colonial expansionism took it from us. We suggest therefore that you move the 'Scottish' capital to Glasgow, or even better Perth, cos Glasgow used to be ours too and we might want it back - alternatively just go back to Ireland and leave the land that you so cruelly colonised. For me the saltire is just a blood-smudged banner of oppression. You should be ashamed to fly it. All we need now is a prominent MP to rise to PM fight our cause. We would have had Tony Blair but he's on your side. |
||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Very well Luke, we (Scotland) will have back Cumbria and Man 
SORTED!
|
||||||||
| Holebender |
You only harm your cause by making unreasonable demands of potential allies. Scots would naturally tend to support your case, but not once you start with your anti-Scottish rant. | ||||||||
| Luke P |
Ehem, sorry I forgot you have a monopoly on ranting  ??
Deal - you can have Cumbria in a fair exchange for the Lothians. At least one of you has studied history. Let's try and make it more peaceful than the India/Pakistan partition ok. Though I would be careful with Cumbria cos you might stir up some Strathclyde nationalism and find yourself in trouble. We make no claim on Man, but you will have to sort that out with the Manx, since they are de facto independent already. |
||||||||
| babykitten |
Re: Northumbrian Independence - sorry.
This is exactly the same kind of nonsense that some people come up with with regards to north sea oil. The attitude is that if the UK can't have it, then we'll cause mischief by demanding that it is all given to the Shetlands, i.e. if Scotland is going to become independent then let's suddenly argue for Shetlands independence. Firstly, this misses the fact that north sea oil is not what Scottish independence is all about. But secondly, it doesn't even begin to hide the motives behind it. It's funny that these people who apparently are so supportive of Shetlands independence or this "Northumbrian People's Alliance" argue vociferously against Scottish independence. The sensible approach, if the causes were actually genuine in the first place, would be to support Scottish independence and learn from it. These fake Shetlands independence supporters (who are never actually from the Shetlands, but simply mischief-maker unionists), don't seem to be arguing for independence from the UK. Only independence from an independent Scotland. Genuine Shetlands independence supporters would be arguing for independence from both, and I'm sure there are some who are doing this, i.e. the genuine ones. So, Luke, people will take you seriously if you accepted that Scotland at the moment has absolutely zero power or ability to 'give in to your demands' and that, if your claim is genuine, you should be arguing for your goals to the UK government, meanwhile supporting Scottish independence efforts. Since you are not doing this, it is obvious that you are simply a trolling unionist. Edit: The language used by Luke is also laughable. "We are angry and want out 'FREEDOM' back." as if to parody some modern-day version of Scottish nationalism based on Braveheart. Well, this modern-day nationalism based on Braveheart is but a tiny, tiny part of those wanting independence. The vast, vast majority are rational, pragmatic people wanting independence for reasons of governance and international normality, not because of a hatred for "the English". |
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
Re: Northumbrian Independence - sorry.First of all, I never take part in on-line voting of any kind. I have seen dozens of "polls" here on the Our Scotland forum, and I have never taken part in any of them. Even with the more sensible sounding ones, the results are meaningless. The "results" of this one will be even more meaningless than usual.
No you're not.
No you're not. What you are saying is not true. You are not Luke P, you are not writing on behalf of the NPA, and you are not a pressure group for Northumbrian independence. Now, maybe you're just making a joke. Like Sacha Baron Cohen when he told folk in the USA that he really was Borat from Kazakhstan and a lot of them believed him. But whether it's a joke or whether it's just a lie, one thing is for certain, it's not true.
No you're not, and no you don't.
Rubbish. You don't "want Lothian and Edinburgh 'back' ". What you want is to have a laugh, but also, since you're obviously really a supporter of keeping the United Kingdom as it is, and an opponent of independence for any part of the UK, as well as having a laugh, you want to belittle the cause of independence for Scotland if you can. I even know WHY you have chosen this particular way of going about it. It's because I have repeatedly stated on this forum that Scotland has no border disputes with any of the neighbours. You KNOW that, of course. You either read what I said here yourself, or, if you didn't read it here yourself, you heard about it from somebody else. So you thought you would have a go at taking the piss and/or proving me wrong. Well, maybe some folk are daft enough to think you're genuine. But I know you're fake. |
||||||||
| Luke P |
I am actually a democrat and I do believe in self-determination, I believe in referenda very much. What I am illustrating here is that what "binds" you together as a Scottish nation is the same thing that binds the UK together. Ultimately I believe there is a British people, diverse from one end to the other, from city to city, but made of pretty much the same stuff. Defining Scotland, or any part of the UK as separate is possible, but is arbitrary, a construct of history (and fantasised history too) and political PR. Borders and boundaries are accidents of history. Just because they existed 300 years ago doesn not mean they are relevant any more. I don't actually believe in England either. I don't believe a Northumbrian is more closely a correlative of Dorset as to Ayrshire. As evidence realise that the 'English' identity pretty much disappeared and is only now coming back as a response to Scottish and Welsh nationalism. No-one flew St George crosses 20 years ago!
Ultimately I am sad, because a) (believe it or not, I LIKE (I would say love, but I might cry) Scotland and its people - and many 'English' people do. and b) because Scotland is undertaking this venture for the wrong reasons. The lie is that Scotland can be independent within the EU. It is not true. It will merely become a minor region of the EU superstate with laws not made in Holyrood, but in Brussels (which is not at all democratic by the way). I know it would not be any worse than the current situation and it would give some temporary satisfaction to that caucus within the nationalist movement who harbour a grudge (real or imagined) against the 'English', but I prefer the British people to stick together and get out of the EU - and really be independent!!! I fear without Scotland there is no UK and no chance to regain that independence. I am sure generations to come will look back and see this as a much worse sell out than 1707. As for the NPA, it is not real, but there are small movements that share the ambition, and if enough people were to subscribe to the arbitrary resurrection of Northumbria as a nation state, the territorial claim would be genuine - as genuine as the Scottish claim for independence. If you are interested in this line check out the insightful comments on: http://www.currybet.net/cbet_blog/2008/10/fscon.php |
||||||||
| Holebender |
Well no, because Scotland exists as a legal jurisdiction with (now) its own legislature. Northumbria exists, but has absolutely no case for claiming any territories outwith its present boundaries.
Your whole case seems to be based on sentiment and self-interest. You want Scotland to be tied to the UK as you see it as some sort of benefit for England. What exactly does Scotland get out of your UK? Quite frankly, I'm tired of people like you using Scotland for your own purposes without any real understanding of or interest in what is good for Scotland. |
||||||||
| Luke P |
Utterly untrue. Your claim is justifiable regarding Scottish Nationalism - that seems to be entirely a self-centred self-obsessed feeding frenzy for whatever suits Scotland and *** the rest of 'em. My intentions are the good of the entire UK, contrary to your claim. Perhaps you cannot grasp the concept because it is alien to you.
Northumbrian nationalism is as real as Northumbrian people want it to be (like Scottish) and if they call out for a legislature of their own they would be as justified as anyone else to have one. And if they want their land back and the city they founded, Edinburgh, and to be reunited to their brothers across the Tweed, they can legitimately claim that. It might require a plebiscite in the Lothians, or a war, but they can legitimately claim it. And do not resort to rash judgments like "people like you". You do not know me. I attempt to employ reason and fact, not dismissal as a means of discussion. |
||||||||
| Holebender |
You may "attempt" to use reason and fact, but you fail utterly to use either.
No-one is denying the right of Northumbria to self-determination; I would be happy to support it. It's the fantasy extra-territorial claims which are ridiculous and could only serve to damage your supposed cause. It's these expansionist claims of yours which serve to prove that you are, in fact, not in the least interested in benefitting Northumbria. If you want to get crude about it, Lothian, etc. are no longer part of Northumbria because the Scots defeated your military ambitions once before. Why should it be any different in future? Do you seriously think you're any cause for concern north of the real border? |
||||||||
| Luke P |
Speculating on military muscle is not really going to get us anywhere but you do raise an interesting fact - history is carved through warfare and to the victor the spoils.
You justify keeping 'Northumbrian' territory on the basis of having won it militarily. But, I am sticking my neck out here - you might also consider military oppression or subjugation entirely wrong when you are on the receiving end.....? And complain vociferously that you want your 'rights' and 'freedoms' back. I suppose the question I am asking is this - are Scots nationalist prepared to treat others with the same respect they demand for themselves. I am seeing a lot of suggestion that the answer may be largely a "no". |
||||||||
| Holebender |
Then you have failed another reading and comprehension test. Read again where I wrote
The difference between Scottish nationalists and people of your ilk is that we respect the rights of everyone to self-determination while you only want what you want and to Hell with anyone else. You have some sort of problem with Scots who desire independence so you have no respect for them. Your lack of respect shines through your every post, and I'm tired of playing with you. You are an unworthy opponent and I've lost interest. |
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
However, in a later message,
therefore, Luke P. is a self-confessed LIAR. |
||||||||
| Luke P |
This is not a response, and as such a concession as I see no counter argument to my suggestion above, merely, again misguided dismissal. Once again, my interest is all the people of the UK, not a minority group. | ||||||||
| Dave Coull |
However, in a later message,
therefore, Luke P. is a self-confessed LIAR.
Yes it is. My response is that you are a LIAR . I don't need to prove this, because you ADMITTED you had been lying.
Your tissue of LIES did not deserve a serious response. |
||||||||
| Holebender |
I said I was giving up on you, but this beauty deserves a response; is not a minority group part of all the people of the UK? Are you really interested in all the people of the UK, or just the majority? It seems you really only want the will of the majority to be imposed on everyone, and dissenters can go hang! |
||||||||
| Lord Pitsligo |
Does your "army" consist of anything other than keyboard heroes like yourself? ****ing troll. |
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
"Luke P" (whose name is not Luke, who does not speak on behalf of any Northumbrian grouping, and who has admitted that he lied in the first post under this heading) says
I treat everybody equally. Now, some folk might suggest what I do is treat everybody equally badly , but, even if there was some truth in that, treating everybody equally badly is, nevertheless, treating everybody EQUALLY. "Luke P" (whose name is not Luke, who does not speak on behalf of any Northumbrian grouping, and who has admitted that he lied in the first post under this heading) says
WHOSE suggestion? Suggestions from fellow-liars like yourself? Or are you in fact just quoting yourself?
Respect has to be EARNED. As far as I'm concerned, when I encounter some new poster on the internet, I'm encountering a blank sheet. I know nothing about them except what they tell me. The very first thing you told me about yourself was that you support Northumbrian independence. Later, you told me that the very first thing you had told me was a lie. That's not the way to earn my respect. |
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
The self-confessed liar Luke P. wrote
India was partitioned because of RELIGION . The British Empire had long had a policy of "divide and rule", of playing one religious group off against another. The results of this British policy, aimed at keeping India as a colony, made the process of independence far worse than would otherwise have been the case. Because it was clear that an independent India would have an overwhelming Hindu majority, Pakistan was specifically created as a Muslim state. The line separating the two states was drawn up by British Empire bureaucrats, quite literally at the last minute. In some places it wasn't even clear until AFTER the last minute. Some folk who had believed they would be in India suddenly found themselves in Pakistan, or vice versa. Independent India had many millions of Muslims within its boundaries. Some of them fled to Pakistan. Meanwhile, millions of Hindus AND SIKHS fled from Pakistan to India. To compare Scotland with Pakistan is nonsense, for the following reasons: (1) Whereas Pakistan was specifically created as a Muslim state, there is no suggestion that an independent Scotland would be committed to a particular religion. (2) Whereas the partition of India happened in an atmosphere of extreme religious hostility, and there was some "official" encouragement by prominent politicians for an exchange of populations, there will be no "official" encouragement for any targeting of "English" residents of Scotland. Quite the opposite - everybody resident in Scotland at independence will automatically become a Scottish citizen, and every effort will be made to keep all of them. (3) Whereas the border between India and Pakistan was simply a line drawn on the map, by foreign bureaucrats, at the last minute, the border between Scotland and England has existed, unchanged, for many centuries. It is, and always has been, a real border. The laws which apply on one side of it have always been different from the laws which apply on the other side of it. To take just one example (out of literally thousands of differences), it was the difference in marriage laws which led to some English teenagers "running away to Gretna Green" (the nearest village in Scotland). (4) The border between Scotland and England is one of the most clear-cut borders in all of Europe. Clearer than the one between Italy and Austria, clearer than the one between France and Belgium, clearer than the one between Belgium and the Netherlands, clearer than the one between Hungary and Romania, clearer than the one between Ukraine and Russia, we in Scotland are in the fortunate position of having only one, short, undisputed, land border. Even the town of Berwick-on-Tweed, which some folk wrongly think a bit of an anomaly, proves this. When the England football team is doing well in the World Cup or some other international footballing competition, you can see hundreds of Saint George flags flying in Berwick. Just a few miles to the north, across the Scottish border, you will not see a single one. At the other side of the country, at times of heightened footballing interest, when crossing into Gretna Green, you will see Scottish flags. When, in 1997, a referendum was held on setting up a Scottish Parliament, there was all sorts of nonsense talked by Unionists. It was predicted that the Shetlands would vote against, or the Borders would vote against, or some other region would vote against. As it turned out, all of these Unionist predictions were wrong. Every region of Scotland voted in favour. I predict it will be the same with independence for Scotland. Every region of Scotland will be in support. Yes, including Lothian. |
||||||||
| azzuri |
...where's the 'I have no opinion' option int the poll?! | ||||||||
| linoleum |
i love the smell of hypocrisy on a sunday.
we can but you can't. |
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
|
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
|
||||||||
| Dave Coull |
|
||||||||
| Aventinian |
Only if Strathclyde is reformed and the Scots kicked out!
The UK is not a nationalist state, an independent Scotland would be. I can certainly see the justification from splitting off from the latter and staying in the former.
How come you never encounter any of them making comments on the websites of national newspapers then? |
||||||||
| Lord Pitsligo |
Because they have lives? |
||||||||
| Holebender |
|
||||||||
| Aventinian |
I'd like to think that's the case, but something tells me it isn't true. The SNP has a hell of a lot of frankly undesirable views amongst its voters - and indeed amongst quite a few of its elected representatives - yet they seem unwilling to address this. |
||||||||
| Lord Pitsligo |
And this is different from any other party how? I suggest you go hang out on the Daily Mail website and read the comments on any Scottish story there - then you'll see just what unpleasant is. |
||||||||