Stuart Hill (Captain Calamity) Forvik

[Watter]

Our very own MP has said Shetland could become a crown dependency in 2014 which would indicate it would be possible given the will . https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/17/shetland-may-reconsider-place-scotland-yes-vote-alistair-carmichael

Edited February 29, 2020 by Watter

[NullVoid]

which would indicate it would be possible given the will .

 

And thats the caveat!

 

People stopped pushing the issue after the first referendum was over with,

The problem is enthusiasm and organization you need more of both and get people to push for it or else it wont happen.

 

furthermore the economy is doing okay in Shetland compared with the rest of the UK so people arent feeling the pinch enough to moan to politicians enough

or have a populist movement besides existing Scottish and British movements who have supporters here.

[Watter]

So it seems the only way to get our politicians interested in real change is for the SNP to gain independence for Scotland . Its interesting to note that nearly all of England's inhabited islands have some form of self government and special tax regimes which bring in billions even the selling of stamps and coins is worth millions to these islands which perhaps explains their large populations Man has roughly the same land mass as Shetland but 4 times the population Jersey is about half  the size of Yell but has over 100,000 residents compared to Yells 1000

Edited March 4, 2020 by Watter

[Evil Inky]

^^^^

I think "nearly all" is an exaggeration. Apart from the Isle of Man, and the four Channel Islands, which I think are the only self-governing ones, there are the five inhabited Isles of Scilly, the Isle of Wight, and the Isle of Sheppy, and possibly others. So "less than half" would be more accurate. 

[Watter]

So it seems the only way to get our politicians interested in real change is for the SNP to gain independence for Scotland . Its interesting to note that nearly all of England's inhabited islands have some form of self government and special tax regimes which bring in billions even the selling of stamps and coins is worth millions to these islands which perhaps explains their large populations Man has roughly the same land mass as Shetland but 4 times the population Jersey is about half  the size of Yell but has over 100,000 residents compared to Yells 1000

Correction the Isle of Man is in fact less than half the size of Shetland 212 sq ml compared to Shetland 567 sq ml . What we do have in common is we both once belonged to Norway .

[George.]

^^^^

I think "nearly all" is an exaggeration. Apart from the Isle of Man, and the four Channel Islands, which I think are the only self-governing ones, there are the five inhabited Isles of Scilly, the Isle of Wight, and the Isle of Sheppy, and possibly others. So "less than half" would be more accurate. 

 

Relationships to British Crown dependencies and wee English islands certainly has something to do with the foreigners south of Scotland.

 

There are a lot of islands in Shetland. There are a lot of islands in Scotland. What was commented on regarding islands, apart from the foreigners?

[Ghostrider]

Just read the article in the Times about Stuart Hill's trial where he repeatedly asked the Sheriff  to prove his authority by showing when and how Orkney and Shetland became part of Scotland . You would think that would be a simple matter but the Sheriff appeared unwilling or unable to do so why is that ?.

He didn't, because he doesn't need to. He is here, enforcing Scots law, with the Scots Police force providing muscle to back him up. Nobody is preventing or even resisting him and them in doing that. The proof that is the case, is that Calamity is sitting in a 6x4 in Craiginches or wherever he is right now.

 

The Sheriff does not need to prove how the power was achieved in the first place, he just needs to demonstrate he holds and weilds it, to prove that the Scots have it, and how and when they got it is irrelevant.

 

Calamity is demonstrating the definition of 'keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome' by following the route he's been on now for years, he's on a hiding to nothing and nowhere.

 

His pursuit of the historic angle of the issue isn't really much better, it's a nice little cherry on top, but its not the best most relevant and legitimate the subject should be driven by and fought on.

 

History is yesterday's news, it can't be undone, and whatever was done is what it is. The future is where its at, how much better off the place and the population could be is what matters. If the majority of folk believe constitutional change would improve our lot, and that majority was definable by way of a referendum result, Scots, Brits, whoever, would have to sit up and take notice and deal with it. Historic shenanigans, back stabbing, double dealing, power grabs or whatever Calamity is trying to 'prove' ain't worth Jack Schitt to anyone or anything without a proven majority mandate from the present population in support of changing the future.

[NullVoid]

So it seems the only way to get our politicians interested in real change is for the SNP to gain independence for Scotland . Its interesting to note that nearly all of England's inhabited islands have some form of self government and special tax regimes which bring in billions even the selling of stamps and coins is worth millions to these islands which perhaps explains their large populations Man has roughly the same land mass as Shetland but 4 times the population Jersey is about half  the size of Yell but has over 100,000 residents compared to Yells 1000

 

Isle of man was a Scottish possession but the Act of union and the fact it can be seen from some beeches in England weather permitting brought it into the English sphere of influence, other islands were when William the conquer split his empire in his will.

They were a port of call for trade with the continent historically which brought in a lot of investment/visitors hence the taxman became interested.

 

Not sure how often people stopped off in IOM to import cotton to the children working the mills of Lancashire or to export beef from Ireland during the potato famine but the wealthy always have separate tax rules and the Rothchilds were the real ruling Dynastic family rather than the Royals so if its for banking and its in a convenient location it will happen.

 

The Caribbean was in a strategic location for trade with North and South America hence they set up shop there,

Shetland hasn't been a major trading hub prior to the oil though and its remoteness reduced the amount of attention it would otherwise get.

Might stop off to trade with Scandinavia who has always had a small population and keep in mind the Swedish government was worried about losing large swaths of its population to the US homesteading act a few centuries prior and the amount of Ethnic Swedes in Minnesota might overtake the amount in Sweden in the next few decades.

 

to get from the isle of man to Aberdeen via train after you have gotten to the mainland is about 8 hours but an airplane could make that trip much quicker and Isle of man is in a much more accessible location than Aberdeen being between Ireland Wales and England,

If a direct flight left from here you might get people going to Shetland en route to go to Northern Scotland and increase passenger numbers and make flights more profitable and possibly cheaper.

Edited March 5, 2020 by NullVoid

[Evil Inky]

 

^^^^

I think "nearly all" is an exaggeration. Apart from the Isle of Man, and the four Channel Islands, which I think are the only self-governing ones, there are the five inhabited Isles of Scilly, the Isle of Wight, and the Isle of Sheppy, and possibly others. So "less than half" would be more accurate. 

 

Relationships to British Crown dependencies and wee English islands certainly has something to do with the foreigners south of Scotland.

 

There are a lot of islands in Shetland. There are a lot of islands in Scotland. What was commented on regarding islands, apart from the foreigners?

 

Watter claimed that "nearly all" England's inhabited islands are self-governing. I pointed out that it's actually less than half. That's all.

[Wheelsup]

Its a shame every forum seems to attract anglo-phobic comments. Gives the SNP a bad name.

[NullVoid]

Its a shame every forum seems to attract anglo-phobic comments. Gives the SNP a bad name.

All their English Friends keep bullying them over the referendum.

 

Was working in an English town with lots of Scottish people around the time of the Brexit vote(Which reminded them of the Scottish vote) and i saw a guy at work impersonating trumps menerisims

"We will make Hadrian's Wall Great again, 10 feet higher and bigger and better that ever before believe me!"

"They are [injoke about Scottish Colleague] And some i assume are good people"

"Where is your work permit?"

 

Actually was lots of fun to be honest.

I have a theory everyone complying about Anglo-phobia just want the people to shut up about independence so their English friends will stop the banter.

 

Here is what you really mean

 

Stop with the nationalism don't get those guys started again

 

Too far left for conservatives too far right for liberals

Edited March 5, 2020 by NullVoid

[George.]

Its a shame every forum seems to attract anglo-phobic comments. Gives the SNP a bad name.

 

Perhaps the majority of us are rather anglophobic because of the way we are abused by Westminster. That's possibly why Westminster is known for what it is.

[Watter]

 

Ju

He didn't, because he doesn't need to. He is here, enforcing Scots law, with the Scots Police force providing muscle to back him up. Nobody is preventing or even resisting him and them in doing that. The proof that is the case, is that Calamity is sitting in a 6x4 in Craiginches or wherever he is right now.

 

The Sheriff does not need to prove how the power was achieved in the first place, he just needs to demonstrate he holds and weilds it, to prove that the Scots have it, and how and when they got it is irrelevant.

 

Calamity is demonstrating the definition of 'keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome' by following the route he's been on now for years, he's on a hiding to nothing and nowhere.

 

His pursuit of the historic angle of the issue isn't really much better, it's a nice little cherry on top, but its not the best most relevant and legitimate the subject should be driven by and fought on.

 

History is yesterday's news, it can't be undone, and whatever was done is what it is. The future is where its at, how much better off the place and the population could be is what matters. If the majority of folk believe constitutional change would improve our lot, and that majority was definable by way of a referendum result, Scots, Brits, whoever, would have to sit up and take notice and deal with it. Historic shenanigans, back stabbing, double dealing, power grabs or whatever Calamity is trying to 'prove' ain't worth Jack Schitt to anyone or anything without a proven majority mandate from the present population in support of changing the future.

 

 

 

Just read the article in the Times about Stuart Hill's trial where he repeatedly asked the Sheriff  to prove his authority by showing when and how Orkney and Shetland became part of Scotland . You would think that would be a simple matter but the Sheriff appeared unwilling or unable to do so why is that ?.

He didn't, because he doesn't need to. He is here, enforcing Scots law, with the Scots Police force providing muscle to back him up. Nobody is preventing or even resisting him and them in doing that. The proof that is the case, is that Calamity is sitting in a 6x4 in Craiginches or wherever he is right now.

 

The Sheriff does not need to prove how the power was achieved in the first place, he just needs to demonstrate he holds and weilds it, to prove that the Scots have it, and how and when they got it is irrelevant.

 

Calamity is demonstrating the definition of 'keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome' by following the route he's been on now for years, he's on a hiding to nothing and nowhere.

 

His pursuit of the historic angle of the issue isn't really much better, it's a nice little cherry on top, but its not the best most relevant and legitimate the subject should be driven by and fought on.

 

History is yesterday's news, it can't be undone, and whatever was done is what it is. The future is where its at, how much better off the place and the population could be is what matters. If the majority of folk believe constitutional change would improve our lot, and that majority was definable by way of a referendum result, Scots, Brits, whoever, would have to sit up and take notice and deal with it. Historic shenanigans, back stabbing, double dealing, power grabs or whatever Calamity is trying to 'prove' ain't worth Jack Schitt to anyone or anything without a proven majority mandate from the present population in support of changing the future.

 

 

 

Just read the article in the Times about Stuart Hill's trial where he repeatedly asked the Sheriff  to prove his authority by showing when and how Orkney and Shetland became part of Scotland . You would think that would be a simple matter but the Sheriff appeared unwilling or unable to do so why is that ?.

He didn't, because he doesn't need to. He is here, enforcing Scots law, with the Scots Police force providing muscle to back him up. Nobody is preventing or even resisting him and them in doing that. The proof that is the case, is that Calamity is sitting in a 6x4 in Craiginches or wherever he is right now.

 

The Sheriff does not need to prove how the power was achieved in the first place, he just needs to demonstrate he holds and weilds it, to prove that the Scots have it, and how and when they got it is irrelevant.

 

Calamity is demonstrating the definition of 'keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome' by following the route he's been on now for years, he's on a hiding to nothing and nowhere.

 

His pursuit of the historic angle of the issue isn't really much better, it's a nice little cherry on top, but its not the best most relevant and legitimate the subject should be driven by and fought on.

 

History is yesterday's news, it can't be undone, and whatever was done is what it is. The future is where its at, how much better off the place and the population could be is what matters. If the majority of folk believe constitutional change would improve our lot, and that majority was definable by way of a referendum result, Scots, Brits, whoever, would have to sit up and take notice and deal with it. Historic shenanigans, back stabbing, double dealing, power grabs or whatever Calamity is trying to 'prove' ain't worth Jack Schitt to anyone or anything without a proven majority mandate from the present population in support of changing the future.

 

One of the problems for the authorities is when in the past people from Orkney and Shetland  have been dragged to court because they have broken Scots law only for it to be proven otherwise take the famous Orkney Swan case where in 1910 a man in Orkney was charged with shooting and keeping a swan which in every other part of Britain belongs to the Crown but not in Orkney in Shetland the case ended up in the high court in Edinburgh  where the crown could not prove ultimate title  and thus lost the case and the man was set free . There have been other cases with similar results which prove our history and right are still valid and have not been  abolished and Scotified . Its highly doubtful if any of the Scots laws surrounding game birds in Orkney and Shetland are valid after this case as they depend on the crown ultimately holding title of the land which is appears they don't . Its the owner of the land who owns them not the Crown .   

Edited March 7, 2020 by Watter

[Watter]

One of the things which i found odd was that if you read our official history books they will tell you that Shetland and Orkney became fully part of Scotland in 1472 yet on the same page its says the Scottish parliament abolished Norse law and introduced Scots law in 1611 . Why the 139 year delay in introducing Scots law if Orkney and Shetland were fully part of Scotland and how could they retrospectively abolish Norse law the truth is they couldn't do that   .   

[George.]

^Are you talking about Udal, Scottish or British law.