Secession - The possibility

Secession - The possibility

Postby huntingross » Sat Sep 20, 2014 12:05 pm

For the briefest of moments, measured in days and weeks, there is the possibility that those people that aspire for independence could take it rather than wait to be given it. Or, measured in months, take it when West Minster fails to deliver the satisfactory extension of devolution offered in the bid to sway the NO vote.

Of those deemed eligible to vote, the following areas said YES -

Dundee City (53,620 people 57.35%)
West Dunbartonshire (33,720 people 53.96%)
Glasgow (194,779 people 53.49%)
North Lanarkshire (115,783 people 51.07%)

West Dunbartonshire, Glasgow and North Lanarkshire have common geographic boundaries forming one area. Together with Dundee there lives the possibility for two independent areas. Secession from the United Kingdom for two micro-nations under a Scotland banner if they so choose.

Now, I know that the people that voted YES for independence (mostly) didn't vote for what is ACTUALLY true independence. But, the important issue is they aspire to what they BELIEVE is true independence and that is extremely important to realise. The belief in something is the surest first step to breaking the bonds.

Will it happen ?

Unfortunately not. People are so tied to the idea that the 'democratic' process binds them to the majority decision. To subjugate their will to the majority, not realising the majority have been blinded and deceived that they are pursuing their will through a democratic process driven by the aristarchy.

Should it happen ?

In the context. Yes. This has turned from an IDEA that the Scottish as a body of people want independence to the FACT that they voted on an area-by-area basis. Those areas want independence and following established conditioning those that voted NO in those areas are to be subjected to the WILL of the majority in that area. Of course the counter argument is voting by area was just a means to collect the result as a whole. But that is what makes it possible to present my proposition.

For those that aspire, you've seen how to stand up. Now it's time to walk.

Good luck and good speed.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Secession - The possibility

Postby pitano1 » Sun Sep 21, 2014 7:35 am

hi h.r
independence,for scotland... :giggle:

adjective
1.
not influenced or controlled by others in matters of opinion, conduct, etc.; thinking or acting for oneself:
an independent thinker.
2.
not subject to another's authority or jurisdiction; autonomous; free:
an independent businessman.
3.
not influenced by the thought or action of others:
independent research.
4.
not dependent; not depending or contingent upon something else for existence, operation, etc.

5.not getting metaphorically,fucked up the arse,by the crown criminals.
[sic]
For the briefest of moments, measured in days and weeks, there is the possibility that those people that aspire for independence could take it rather than wait to be given it. Or, measured in months, take it when West Minster fails to deliver the satisfactory extension of devolution offered in the bid to sway the NO vote.

great idea.
here`s another,when ca`moran,and his pals arrive shedding crocadile tears..shoot them.. :giggle:


Of those deemed eligible to vote, the following areas said YES -

Dundee City (53,620 people 57.35%)
West Dunbartonshire (33,720 people 53.96%)
Glasgow (194,779 people 53.49%)
North Lanarkshire (115,783 people 51.07%)

i see you have a ministry of truth...too.

[sic]
Unfortunately not. People are so tied to the idea that the 'democratic' process binds them to the majority decision. To subjugate their will to the majority, not realising the majority have been blinded and deceived that they are pursuing their will through a democratic process driven by the aristarchy.

to wit]
the height of immorality.

freedom stems,from personal responsability...not DELEGATION.

YES...indeed,it is time to walk,and not just,in scotland.

kind regards
chris
If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.
Henry David Thoreau
ALL UNALIENABLE RIGHTS RESERVED -AB INITIO - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
pitano1
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: on the land

Height of Irony

Postby huntingross » Sun Sep 21, 2014 10:01 am

Thanks Chris. An interesting phrase "height of immorality" because this mornings ditty is titled "height of irony".

In 2007 the SNP were elected to the Scottish Parliament as a minority government with 47 seats to Scottish Labour 46. OK, a close call and not the basis for my point...which I will get to.

In 2011 the SNP were re-elected as a majority government with 69 seats of 129 total.

The election delivered the first majority government since the opening of Holyrood, a remarkable feat as the mixed member proportional representation system used to elect MSPs was, according to Jack McConnell, originally implemented to prevent any party achieving an overall parliamentary majority.


Now to my point. One would take from a so called democratic process that such "a remarkable feat" voting for a pro-independence party would have delivered independence at that time. After all the SNP broke the system that was designed to prevent such a thing happening...AND I mean specifically THEM happening.

Remember. Devolution wasn't supposed to allow the independence movement from ever gaining political ground. So the will of the people had to be extremely WILLFUL.

Yet I have never seen a claim by the SNP to that effect. An obvious claim you would think.

The agenda of the SNP party now lies open. The 'draft constitution' they offered up as a model of how it would be after a YES vote states

24(2) Scots law is of no effect so far as it is inconsistent with EU law.

In Chapter 2 [The Bill] details how Scotland would prepare a permanent written constitution fit for an independent state of which the people are sovereign.

www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0045/00452762.pdf


As the enlightened know. A people can not be sovereign if they are not in control of such things.

Like all political parties. The SNP giveth and the SNP taketh away.

Scotland was never going to be given independence. The surprise was back in 2011 when something happened that was designed not to happen. Three years later the aristarchy ensured they had their game in gear, pedaling fear and ignorance. Plan B was the SNP. If the children don't stay with the UK atleast they stay with the EU.

And so a people nearly came of age. The term that springs to mind is 'failure to launch' or 'parasitic singles'. A generation of children not ready or prepared to leave the parent[s] and all those creature comforts.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Secession - The possibility

Postby pitano1 » Sun Sep 21, 2014 6:54 pm

hi hr.
i do,hope that,you don`t think i`m being pedantic...but.

POLITICS....is a crock of shit,built on a foundation of doublethink.

in fact the polititions need locking up,and medicating...NOW.

sic]
In Chapter 2 [The Bill] details how Scotland would prepare a permanent written constitution fit for an independent state of which the people are sovereign.]

where does scotland live.
can scotland sign....anything..?

sic]
As the enlightened know. A people can not be sovereign if they are not in control of such things.]

how can...anyone give us what is inherant,and cannot be,lawfully removed.?

sic]
A generation of children not ready or prepared to leave the parent[s] and all those creature comforts.

i think you have hit,the nail on the head... :shake:
If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.
Henry David Thoreau
ALL UNALIENABLE RIGHTS RESERVED -AB INITIO - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
pitano1
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: on the land

Re: Secession - The possibility

Postby huntingross » Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:41 pm

You're not being pedantic Chris. I'm not being clear.

What I hoped to demonstrate to those clinging to the rock, hanging on to the architrave is the point you're making. That politics, the aristarchy, the system is and always was balanced against them.

The people sent a message in 2011 that broke the system designed to prevent independence gaining political ground.

If the people were to pay attention they would realise politics will never fix their problems, their issues, their lives. It will simply thwart them at every turn.

Scotland was never going to get independence. A truly pro-independence party under circumstances I've highlighted would have got there by now.

If the people could see past the smoke and mirrors. If they really understood the meaning and purpose of independence. Then the first step lies in the fragments left after the YES/NO vote.

We declared independence in 2009. I'm not aware of any others following suit, Forvik was already a Crown Dependency. To us it seems to be the most obvious statement of resignation from UK PLC.

My point if somewhat lost in these posts, is this. There is a significant number of people clustered around one of Great Britains cities, Glasgow, that could send a serious message to everyone else in Britain. A message not being received to date -

1967 - http://www.sealandgov.org
1977 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictish_Free_State
2009 - https://sites.google.com/site/markjenningssovereign/the-sovereign-state-of-fidach
2012 - http://www.forvik.com/about/declarations/

The Scots got worked over by the words and deeds of those they trusted. They just haven't figured it out yet.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Secession - The possibility

Postby pitano1 » Mon Sep 22, 2014 8:09 am

hi.hr
[sic]
The Scots got worked over by the words and deeds of those they trusted. They just haven't figured it out yet.

i quite agree,but sadly,this mentality is not confined to the people of..[scotland]..in fact,it applies,to
any nation,that, has a government....period.

e.g.
i will use the board of directors,of the U.K..L.T.D company/.`so called`government,as an
example.

if this,so called...government,were condensed in to one person,they would have been
locked away,in a secure unit for the criminally insane.

short list of crimes,and evidence
of insanity,and criminality
1] living in an imaginary world,and
forcing others to comply,with
this affliction.

2] making..so called`laws,that
only apply down,and not unilaterally.
ie..they are a law,unto themselves.

3]conspiring,and creating criminal
gangs,to enforce this `so called law`
for the purpose of enrichment.

4]murder..[of millions]

5] slavery.[of millions]

6]sexual perversions.

7] assault,and battery...[shocking]
and....the people,still think voting,is
a good idea.

i could be here all day.. :giggle:
so i will end,on the subject,of democracy.
the will of the....MAJORITY.
which,when examined..is....IMMORAL..ab initio.

ie...no one has the right..to force...their....will..on...another.

kind regards.
chris.
If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.
Henry David Thoreau
ALL UNALIENABLE RIGHTS RESERVED -AB INITIO - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
pitano1
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: on the land


Return to Empowering thoughts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest