Comments on: Secession

By: katastic

katastic — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:54:33 +0000

I once had vegetarian haggis in Scotland. Which just goes to show you what a phony I am.
PS SHHHH, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? LET them secede.

By: braak

braak — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:42:19 +0000

Yes. And, if I recall, literally every store in Edinburgh sells, in addition to their regular products, Scotch. It is impossible to walk more than a block without finding some Scotch.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:35:02 +0000

Chris B – You can also eat anything you like deep-fried. Up to and including pizza. The deep-fried Mars bars (I think that’s a Milky Way in the States) is a particularly notorious favourite. That way you get to feel what it’s like to have a boiled sheep’s heart in your chest.

Chris H – you’re very welcome. Try the deep-fried haggis.

By: Hsiang

Hsiang — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:11:57 +0000

Thanks for the info, Dave!

By: braak

braak — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:52:51 +0000

Man, I want to go back to Scotland. It is rad. You can eat food made out of boiled sheep’s heart. WHICH IS DELICIOUS.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:09:38 +0000

We’re not quite at the seceding stage yet,. We have our own Parliament and some tax-raising powers, but are far from full independence. The suggestion from those who want a separate Scotland is that we’d be rolling in money due to the oil revenues we could expect (it’d make us the third richest state in Europe, I think), but those figures are slightly murky when you look closely.

There was a referendum held in 1979, but independence didn’t get enough support then (suggestions were made that the oil would run out within 5 years).

Now, certainly, I don’t think Scotland would be worse off (unless we went for another Darien scheme, which bankrupted us in the first place – hence the Union), but I think that people in general are a little too unsure of what it could mean for them to demand it too vociferously.

To address your other point, “Not proven” as a verdict is brilliant – it has no real legal difference compared to “Innocent”, but it certainly sends a message, namely: “We know you did it but we can’t quite make it stick. We’ve got our eye on you, boy.”

By: Hsiang

Hsiang — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 23:14:46 +0000

Hey Dave, aren’t you Scots doing some seceding of your own?
I understand there are some differences in the legal codes (love how a defendant cab be found “guilty”, “not guilty”, or “not innocent”). You have your own autonomous parliament as well, right? How’s the movement towards full independence going; is it taken seriously by the citizenry at large or just the crackpot contingent?

–A Curious & Ignorant Yank

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:37:51 +0000

Listen to you colonials getting your knickers in a twist…

By: BRAAK

BRAAK — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:02:08 +0000

THERE WAS NO AMERICAN LAW BACK THEN! IT WAS OLDE THYME DAYES!

By: Moff

Moff — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:18:03 +0000

Using the Declaration of Independence as an example of a “secessionist document” is also extremely stupid because, as I’m sure you’re well aware, the American Revolution WAS illegal under British Law.

Uh, yeah, but it was LEGAL under AMERICAN LAW.

British law? What are you, some kinda fag?

USA! USA! USA!