Billions of pounds wiped from value of Scottish firms after yes vote

You know what? I'm done. You rant about people believing what the media and government apparently shove down our throats but then tell me to Google? You are a joke. You want people to believe in your theories and your independent Scotland but you refuse to give any actual intelligent answers other than Scotland will rise we will survive, like an overworked Gloria gaynor song.

Good luck with your non corrupt government. By the way I truly do want Scotland to succeed if it comes to it. However I think there are justifiable concerns that you just aren't willing to think about, instead just slogging on with your we will overcome spiel.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
a reply to: AngryCymraeg
What age are you, 5?
Listen, after your Anti English bigoted rant a few days ago i do believe you may be trying to win back some brownie points from the people you offended.
It wont wash me me.
Now lose yourself Bigot child.

Aha. So I ask relevant questions and point out nasty truths and that makes me a bigot and a child. Pot, kettle, black anyone?
So - you won't answer my questions. What a shocker!

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

"A list"?? What next, you'll set the police on them? What about those who vote 'No', are you going to keep a list of them as well? Or will you be standing at the entrance to your nearest polling booth, cracking your knuckles and telling those who go in that they have to vote 'Yes' if they know what's good for them?

It is strange that you would try and twist what has been said. No one has suggested that a no voter does not have the right to choose the Union. You would seem to have some sort of agenda.

The list would relate to those that have deliberately lied and those that support the bias portrayed by the media and Westminster. Salmond is right, there should be an enquiry into the Treasury and the BBC's release of confidential information and the motivation behind it. More baseless scaremongering tactics.

It may be too that we can boycott companies, not for supporting the no campaign but those that have delibrately misled us. The only way we can punish those large companies like BP will be after independence. If a no vote is the outcome then I hope there is an immediate call for all those that voted yes to stop all payments of licence fees to the BBC.

I ask everyone their views on independence, not one yes supporter has mentioned oil. The oil stuff really comes from the no supporters. The majority of yes supporters I have listened to are more concerned with the current set up at Westminster and all that goes with it. There has not been one that envisages some sort of oil laden rosy future.

The no supporters don't seem to realise that there would be no real support for independence if we had some sort of viable alternative. We have doubts, we have concerns too but we also have a backbone. All you nay-sayers should hang your heads...you would have a group of people give up the chance to unhitch themselves from the corruption that is Westminster...why would you not support that?

originally posted by: midicon
More baseless scaremongering tactics.

It was at this point I knew where this was going...

originally posted by: midicon
If a no vote is the outcome then I hope there is an immediate call for all those that voted yes to stop all payments of licence fees to the BBC.

And how would you enforce this, exactly?

originally posted by: midicon
not one yes supporter has mentioned oil. The oil stuff really comes from the no supporters.

Not only is that a lie, it doesn't even make sense. Why would the 'oil stuff' as you call it, come from the 'Better Together' campaign? One of the primary arguments used by Salmond & Sturgeon is the money accumulated through oil if independence is voted for, since it would be handled via the Scottish Exchequer and not George Osborne.

originally posted by: midicon
All you nay-sayers should hang your heads...you would have a group of people give up the chance to unhitch themselves from the corruption that is Westminster...why would you not support that?

"the corruption that is Westminster" I'm interested to hear what you know about westminster, given you think that's the problem here.

a reply to: angryhulk

So you must not agree with the SNP's plans to (re)join NATO?

A vote for independence is not a vote for the SNP, perhaps you missed that. I don't agree with the SNP's plans for the future of Scotland but I will be voting yes. We will see what the following election brings.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: angryhulk

So you must not agree with the SNP's plans to (re)join NATO?

A vote for independence is not a vote for the SNP, perhaps you missed that. I don't agree with the SNP's plans for the future of Scotland but I will be voting yes. We will see what the following election brings.

Ah, of course. You really are on the ball. Let's put the white paper to one side. So who are you voting for midicon? SNP? Labour? Greens? Lib Dem? Tory?... Tell me a little bit more about why my comment regarding NATO is incorrect. I take it you understand the other parties policies on defence given we go independent? Do they not wish to participate in NATO? Scotland is just going to go it alone...? OK.

a reply to: angryhulk

It was at this point I knew where this was going...

Where was it going?

And how would you enforce this, exactly?

It couldn't be enforced but the call could be made and if nothing else give the BBC the publicity it deserves.

Not only is that a lie, it doesn't even make sense. Why would the 'oil stuff' as you call it, come from the 'Better Together' campaign? One of the primary arguments used by Salmond & Sturgeon is the money accumulated through oil if independence is voted for, since it would be handled via the Scottish Exchequer and not George Osborne.

Don't call me a liar. The oil stuff was put to bed in earlier debates and if the truth lies somewhere between the two camps then that will be enough for me. The oil gets mentioned in the negative sense by no supporters when the yes supporters get accused of pie in the sky oil expectations. In reality people are fed up with Westminster and all that goes with it.

"the corruption that is Westminster" I'm interested to hear what you know about westminster, given you think that's the problem here.

I don't think that you are really interested in anything other than negativity.

originally posted by: midicon
Where was it going?

What kind of ridiculous deflection was that?

originally posted by: midicon
It couldn't be enforced but the call could be made and if nothing else give the BBC the publicity it deserves.

It couldn't be enforced. You are absolutely right.

originally posted by: midicon
Don't call me a liar. The oil stuff was put to bed in earlier debates and if the truth lies somewhere between the two camps then that will be enough for me. The oil gets mentioned in the negative sense by no supporters when the yes supporters get accused of pie in the sky oil expectations. In reality people are fed up with Westminster and all that goes with it.

I've highlighted in bold your contradiction and at the same time proving not that you are a liar as such, but that you don't have a clue what's going on really, do you?

originally posted by: midicon
I don't think that you are really interested in anything other than negativity.

How about you just answer the questions? How on earth am I being negative by asking you questions? If we are not 'scaremongering' we are being 'negative' because none of you, even on live TV debates, have managed to pull together an answer to key questions the public ask so you deflect, deflect, deflect.

a reply to: angryhulk

Ah, of course. You really are on the ball. Let's put the white paper to one side. So who are you voting for midicon? SNP? Labour? Greens? Lib Dem? Tory?... Tell me a little bit more about why my comment regarding NATO is incorrect. I take it you understand the other parties policies on defence given we go independent? Do they not wish to participate in NATO? Scotland is just going to go it alone...? OK.

I don't know who I am voting for, I have only voted once before. Your statement was incorrect because you assumed a yes vote was in support of the SNP. Perhaps I was wrong no big deal.

I have a simple view...no monarchy, no Westminster, no Whitehall, no House of Lords, no City of London and no Bank of England. Create our own currency, our own central bank, re-nationalise the energy companies...onward ever onward.

No gain without pain.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: angryhulk

Ah, of course. You really are on the ball. Let's put the white paper to one side. So who are you voting for midicon? SNP? Labour? Greens? Lib Dem? Tory?... Tell me a little bit more about why my comment regarding NATO is incorrect. I take it you understand the other parties policies on defence given we go independent? Do they not wish to participate in NATO? Scotland is just going to go it alone...? OK.

I don't know who I am voting for, I have only voted once before. Your statement was incorrect because you assumed a yes vote was in support of the SNP. Perhaps I was wrong no big deal.

I have a simple view...no monarchy, no Westminster, no Whitehall, no House of Lords, no City of London and no Bank of England. Create our own currency, our own central bank, re-nationalise the energy companies...onward ever onward.

No gain without pain.

Good grief... how on earth would you even start on that list? Eventual gain for instant immediate pain you mean!

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: angryhulk
Your statement was incorrect because you assumed a yes vote was in support of the SNP. Perhaps I was wrong no big deal.

No I didn't. I asked him if he disagreed with the SNP's plans to join NATO. Considering it's the SNP spear-heading this campaign, that's a fair question to ask regardless if they come to power or not (following potential independence).

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

That list was just to show my views on politics, I like to be honest about things. I am not saying any of that is going to happen but it would be nice.

I am voting yes because I want a brighter future for this country. There may be pain but should we shy away from that? It is not as if this opportunity will come around again. A few weeks ago even Darling was saying we could of course succeed as an independent nation. Now it has become a re-run of the great depression.

a reply to: angryhulk

No I didn't. I asked him if he disagreed with the SNP's plans to join NATO. Considering it's the SNP spear-heading this campaign, that's a fair question to ask regardless if they come to power or not (following potential independence).

My point is that we don't have to agree with the SNP's policies to desire independence. We might be stuck with them of course as they might continue in power after the following election.

It is a fair question as Iraq was mentioned.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

That list was just to show my views on politics, I like to be honest about things. I am not saying any of that is going to happen but it would be nice.

I am voting yes because I want a brighter future for this country. There may be pain but should we shy away from that? It is not as if this opportunity will come around again. A few weeks ago even Darling was saying we could of course succeed as an independent nation. Now it has become a re-run of the great depression.

It's the degree of pain that concerns me. I find Salmonds' claims to be perhaps far too optimistic. The oil reserves are not that easily (or rather economically) accessed, the currency question is very real (no pound) and the debt issue is vast.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
a reply to: AngryCymraeg
What age are you, 5?
Listen, after your Anti English bigoted rant a few days ago i do believe you may be trying to win back some brownie points from the people you offended.
It wont wash me me.
Now lose yourself Bigot child.

Aha. So I ask relevant questions and point out nasty truths and that makes me a bigot and a child. Pot, kettle, black anyone?
So - you won't answer my questions. What a shocker!

How many times do you want me to Answer your question, or is it the fact the answer i have given you on several occasions now doesn't fit with your agenda....
I Seriously think you are either blind ignorant or blind drunk again... What makes you a Bigot is when you post statements like, and i quote YOU..."I Hate the English", end quote....or have you forgotten about that.

What makes you a child the fact you are running around in here trying to have everyone believe you are some form if reformed character and as i said previously, you are trying to curry favour with those who you offended. it's what children do when they go into full on panic mode.

originally posted by: christmaspig
You know what? I'm done. You rant about people believing what the media and government apparently shove down our throats but then tell me to Google? You are a joke. You want people to believe in your theories and your independent Scotland but you refuse to give any actual intelligent answers other than Scotland will rise we will survive, like an overworked Gloria gaynor song.

Good luck with your non corrupt government. By the way I truly do want Scotland to succeed if it comes to it. However I think there are justifiable concerns that you just aren't willing to think about, instead just slogging on with your we will overcome spiel.

I gave you answers on all three of your questions, see bottom of page 10...

Maybe it was the level of your questions that were bellow average intelligence or my answers were a bit above what your brain could handle.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It's the degree of pain that concerns me. I find Salmonds' claims to be perhaps far too optimistic. The oil reserves are not that easily (or rather economically) accessed, the currency question is very real (no pound) and the debt issue is vast.

I think the oil reserves are fine, perhaps not in the bonanza sense but with viable forecasts and new extraction techniques. Salmond might be right, he said he had been told that currency union would be desirable by the UK. Wouldn't it be funny if we vote for independence and a currency union is announced? No one would be surprised. I would much rather create our own currency.

Scotland as a nation is going nowhere, in fact like everywhere else it's a slow economic downhill slide. Only we can change it, the gravy train of Westminster isn't going to. There does not have to be pain of course but we have to have the courage to face that prospect. We might not get this chance again shall we squander it through fear?

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It's the degree of pain that concerns me. I find Salmonds' claims to be perhaps far too optimistic. The oil reserves are not that easily (or rather economically) accessed, the currency question is very real (no pound) and the debt issue is vast.

I think the oil reserves are fine, perhaps not in the bonanza sense but with viable forecasts and new extraction techniques. Salmond might be right, he said he had been told that currency union would be desirable by the UK. Wouldn't it be funny if we vote for independence and a currency union is announced? No one would be surprised. I would much rather create our own currency.

Scotland as a nation is going nowhere, in fact like everywhere else it's a slow economic downhill slide. Only we can change it, the gravy train of Westminster isn't going to. There does not have to be pain of course but we have to have the courage to face that prospect. We might not get this chance again shall we squander it through fear?

Can you explain why you think the oil reserves are fine?

Is it the remaining 'guess-timated' boe you are concerned with or the cost?

I asked you previously to highlight your problem areas with Westminster and you still haven't albeit you are still dropping the whole 'blame westminster' lines. So, enlighten me.

Fear? Or facts?

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
a reply to: AngryCymraeg
What age are you, 5?
Listen, after your Anti English bigoted rant a few days ago i do believe you may be trying to win back some brownie points from the people you offended.
It wont wash me me.
Now lose yourself Bigot child.

Aha. So I ask relevant questions and point out nasty truths and that makes me a bigot and a child. Pot, kettle, black anyone?
So - you won't answer my questions. What a shocker!

How many times do you want me to Answer your question, or is it the fact the answer i have given you on several occasions now doesn't fit with your agenda....
I Seriously think you are either blind ignorant or blind drunk again... What makes you a Bigot is when you post statements like, and i quote YOU..."I Hate the English", end quote....or have you forgotten about that.

What makes you a child the fact you are running around in here trying to have everyone believe you are some form if reformed character and as i said previously, you are trying to curry favour with those who you offended. it's what children do when they go into full on panic mode.

Oh look. Character assassination. I make one angry comment, a comment that I regretted and apologised for, and all of a sudden I'm 'currying favour'. No, actually, I'm sorry to burst your bubble. I'm just someone who doesn't believe the overoptimistic predictions that are tumbling from the mouth of a professional liar, sorry, politician like Salmond. And I have been extremely interested in the bile and hate that has been dripping from your own mouth. You seem to scorn the idea that people who want to vote 'No' might have a point. They might have their own reasons to doubt Salmond. That's their right. That's democracy. You applaud Sillars? Fine, that's your right too. But if you can't see the dangers in his angry factionalism and promises of revenge, then you are a very angry person indeed.
So, here's the question again. What happens after this vote to tone down the anger and the threats? How do you create a united country after the comments from people like Sillars?