Jump to content

Screwballs for independence


Mr Bairn

Recommended Posts

Not a serious thread but I found this pretty funny

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Jacobite_Party

Some of its other views included moving the Scottish and English border southwards to run from Morecambe Bay to Flamborough Head along latitude 54 degrees, 7 minutes North (thus adding Carlisle, Durham, Sunderland, Teesside and Tyneside to Scotland). In consequence, Newcastle United F.C., Sunderland A.F.C., Middlesbrough F.C. and Carlisle United F.C. would be transferred into theScottish Premier League, It advocated that all football teams in this league should be nationalised, with television revenues being split equally amongst all participating clubs. Foreign players would also be banned from playing in Scotland.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironic considering the Jacobites were generally unionists, namely looking to get the Stewart lineage onto the combined thrones of England, Scotland and Wales.

They were hardly "more unionist" than William of Orange, pal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were hardly "more unionist" than William of Orange, pal.

You would start an argument in an empty room. Are we playing "Unionist top trumps" here? James II (or VII, whichever way you cut it) was a king that ruled over the kingdoms of Scotland, England and Wales and whom the Jacobites wished returned to power. It's safe to say that he was a unionist, albeit the Act of Union was some years away.

As for "pal" that's just... well... weird. Are you trying to sound aggressive or sardonic. Either way you've failed with both, you've just ended up looking a bit of an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And thread jacked within 3 posts. Brilliant. This is supposed to a joke thread based on the idea of an SPL with those English teams in it and no foreigners allowed.

Blame the idiot, I was merely pointing out the irony that a party supporting independence has taken the name of a group of people supporting a union king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would start an argument in an empty room. Are we playing "Unionist top trumps" here? James II (or VII, whichever way you cut it) was a king that ruled over the kingdoms of Scotland, England and Wales and whom the Jacobites wished returned to power. It's safe to say that he was a unionist, albeit the Act of Union was some years away.

As for "pal" that's just... well... weird. Are you trying to sound aggressive or sardonic. Either way you've failed with both, you've just ended up looking a bit of an idiot.

My point was your use of "ironic" was stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subjective nonsense. You have tried to be smart, only to fail.

The Jacobites were less Unionist than the people they fought against. This is undeniable. They were concerned only with the restoration of the Catholic line to the three Crowns of distinct Kingdoms. They were not party to or supportive of the efforts to bring Scotland, England and Ireland into political union.

They were no more "unionists" than Alex Salmond is because he wants to keep the Queen the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good few years ago now, I knew a hardcore Celtic man who supported independence simply as a way to keep Rangers out of the EPL.

There's no longer any danger on that front, and since this guy was a bit of a roaster, I have a feeling he will have lapsed back into laughable Galloway-esque Green Unionism by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus, what a mess you are making of this. All because you are trying to defend a put down you got wrong.

Unless you believe that Alex Salmond is a Unionist because he proposes to keep the Union of the Crowns, the Jacobites were not Unionists. It's that simple really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...