Page 3 of 3 [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

29 Jul 2015, 2:25 pm

Btw Scotland wanted to be a a colonial power, it bankrupted itself in the process.

It is debatable whether they were forced to join certainly not by invasion. England wrote off a debt worth today around £80 million.

Given that England had a Scottish King and the UK has 7 Scottish Prime Ministers your assessment of the history is a slanted one sided at best.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

29 Jul 2015, 2:31 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
xenocity wrote:
You missed all the calls for investigation into the alleged vote rigging for the No side during the Scottish referendum?
Even the BBC reported on it.
Westminster will not let Scotland go and let the UK be broken up, no matter what.

The allegations are paper thin, and the "evidence" of vote rigging was rubbish by the Yes campaign as it was unveiled. Do you really think "Westminster" would have wasted so much time and money promoting the "No" campaign if they were just going to rig the vote?


Did the Yes campaign / SNP actually peruse this? From my understanding it never got past allegations.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

29 Jul 2015, 2:49 pm

Part of the Scottish stipulation of the act of Union was that there would have access to colonial wealth.

At the high of the East India company half of the writers (administrators) were Scottish.

Why view Scotland in a historical light you say? Well why do it to the English? English people are not in the 19th century either. Neither are the Spaniards, Belgians, French, Dutch, Italians, Portuguese or countless others.