National Anthem

[Smith]

Tut. That's poor reasoning, you should support the one you're most fond of, not the one you think is most likely to win. That thinking is for gambling, support is from the heart.


I support the one that is mostly likely to win because for the purposes of that particular sport, they are the ones I am most fond of.

[hr]
1/i = -i

[LonelyPilgrim]

[s]exnihilo wrote on 15:32, 8th Mar 2005:
Thank you! I've had this argument with American friends who refused to believe me. Whereas, I [i]knew I was right from having studied the civil War in some depth. Glad to see it confirmed, and to see my experience of banging my head against a wall of wilful ignorance is not an unique one.
[/i]

Indeed. The rectangular red flag with the blue starfilled St Andrews cross is the Naval Jack. If it's square, with a white border, it is the Battle Standard.

The National Flag changed three times during those few years. The Stars and Bars is the most 'common', but was actually only used for a fairly short period. Most of the war was fought under the 'Stainless Banner' which was mostly white. It was not used extensively as a military flag because it was too often confused for a flag of surrender. Hence the need for a Naval Ensign and a Battle Standard.

[hr]
I sing of arms, and the man...

[flarewearer]

[s]exnihilo wrote on 15:21, 8th Mar 2005:
edit: And it's Union [i]Flag, not Union Jack.
[/i]
Unless, of course, it's on a jackstaff.
[/i]

Actually, that isnt true, even if it looks right in theory. The modern (1801) Union "flag" has always been reffered to as the Union Jack, irrespective of use.
Royal Navy vessels only fly the Union Jack on the jackstaff (the flag pole on the front of a ship) when stationary in harbour. No other vessel should fly the union Jack off the Jackstaff.

[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]

[kas48]

this topic is getting old, and i can't be bothered arguing with you, because it's useless. i can't understand why scots would want to be classified as british, anymore than i understand how people can be stupid and guilable enough to beleive in "god".

[flarewearer]

[s]kas48 wrote on 16:34, 8th Mar 2005:
this topic is getting old, and i can't be bothered arguing with you, because it's useless. i can't understand why scots would want to be classified as british, anymore than i understand how people can be stupid and guilable enough to beleive in "god".


its your single-minded unwillingless to accept other people's points' of view and/or beliefs that make this less of an argument than you just spouting forth the proverbial.

[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]

[Smith]

[s]kas48 wrote on 16:34, 8th Mar 2005:
this topic is getting old, and i can't be bothered arguing with you, because it's useless. i can't understand why scots would want to be classified as british, anymore than i understand how people can be stupid and guilable enough to beleive in "god".



I can't understand why Scots are so desperate to distance themselves from
the English and Welsh, and you haven't provided substantial evidence for this either. You say you can't be bothered, but the truth is you have nothing left to say.

And also, you can't disprove or prove "god" either way, so your disbelief is just as stupid and gullible as anothers belief, by your own reasoning.

[exnihilo]

[s]flarewearer wrote on 16:12, 8th Mar 2005:
Actually, that isnt true, even if it looks right in theory. The modern (1801) Union "flag" has always been reffered to as the Union Jack, irrespective of use.

Officially, however, the national flag is still called the Union Flag. Even if everyone else calls it the Union Jack it is only properly a Jack when flown from the jackstaff. But I digress from the purpose of this thread. Which, I suspect, will now die as the main protagonist has admitted to having no arguments to counter anything being said other than an ignorant intransigent belief in what ain't so. Not unlike the believers, he/she also condemns.

[Pender Native]

[s]kas48 wrote on 16:34, 8th Mar 2005:
i can't understand why scots would want to be classified as british,


Neither can I, but I respect their right to be so, and wouldn't dream of denying them their nationality on those grounds.

[hr]
'I like to listen to a man who likes to talk. Whoops! Sawdust and Treacle, put that in your herring and smoke it!' - quote from the Bursar in Terry Pratchett's Discworld books. Hope that clears up any confusion as to my personal tastes!

[LonelyPilgrim]

What I do not understand is why it is often presented as an either/or question. Surely you can be both Scottish and British?

False dichotomies piss me off...

[hr]I sing of arms, and the man...

[flarewearer]

[s]exnihilo wrote on 16:50, 8th Mar 2005:
Officially, however, the national flag is still called the Union Flag...


I don't want to be a pedant, but!;

"The following is quoted from the article on the flag's name at the website of the Flag Institute, by Cdr Bruce Nicolls OBE RN (Ret'd):

The first use of the name 'Union' appears in 1625. There are various theories as [to] how it became known as the 'Union Jack', but most of the evidence points to the name being derived from the use of the word 'jack' as a diminutive. This word was in use before 1600 to describe a small flag flown from the small mast mounted on the bowsprit, and by 1627 it appears that a small version of the Union flag was commonly flown in this position. For some years it was called just 'the Jack', or 'Jack flag', or 'the King's Jack', but by 1674, while formally referred to as 'His Majesty's Jack', it was commonly called the Union Jack, and this was officially acknowledged.

In the 18th century the small mast on the bowsprit was replaced by staysails on the stays between the bowsprit and the foremast. By this time the Ensign had become the principal naval distinguishing flag, so it became the practice to fly the Union Jack only in harbour, on a specially rigged staff in the bows of the ships, the jackstaff. It should thus be noted that the jack flag had existed for over a hundred and fifty years before the jack staff came into being, and its name was related to its size rather than to the position in which it was flown.

It is often stated that the Union Flag should only be described as the Union Jack when flown in the bows of a warship, but this is a relatively recent idea. From early in its life the Admiralty itself frequently referred to the flag as the Union Jack, whatever its use, and in 1902 an Admiralty Circular announced that Their Lordships had decided that either name could be used officially. Such use was given parliamentary approval in 1908 when it was stated that "the Union Jack should be regarded as the National flag"."

Apart from that I wholeheartedly agree with you.


[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]

[flarewearer]

[s]LonelyPilgrim wrote on 17:01, 8th Mar 2005:
What I do not understand is why it is often presented as an either/or question. Surely you can be both Scottish and British?

False dichotomies piss me off...

[hr]I sing of arms, and the man...


yes, I look upon Scotland as an American might look upon their state, and I look upon the UK as an American might the USA whole.

[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]

[kas48]

[s]Smith wrote on 16:48, 8th Mar 2005:
[s]kas48 wrote on 16:34, 8th Mar 2005:[i]
this topic is getting old, and i can't be bothered arguing with you, because it's useless. i can't understand why scots would want to be classified as british, anymore than i understand how people can be stupid and guilable enough to beleive in "god".



I can't understand why Scots are so desperate to distance themselves from
the English and Welsh, and you haven't provided substantial evidence for this either. You say you can't be bothered, but the truth is you have nothing left to say.

And also, you can't disprove or prove "god" either way, so your disbelief is just as stupid and gullible as anothers belief, by your own reasoning.
[/i]



i would make the effort if i wasn't talking mostly to a load of wan***s who spend their whole lives on the Sinner Chatroom bitching about me. it is not worth the bother justifying myself to you and your lousy virtual friends.

[kas48]

yes, I look upon Scotland as an American might look upon their state, and I look upon the UK as an American might the USA whole.

[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]
[/i]



ps: not the same thing.

[flarewearer]

[s]kas48 wrote on 17:09, 8th Mar 2005:

ps: not the same thing.


no shit fuck-for-brains, in case you didnt notice i put "as an American might"

(Paul was really onto something there with the emboldening to strengthen one's point)

[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]

[exnihilo]

[s]kas48 wrote on 17:08, 8th Mar 2005:
i would make the effort if i wasn't talking mostly to a load of wan***s who spend their whole lives on the Sinner Chatroom bitching about me. it is not worth the bother justifying myself to you and your lousy virtual friends.


Hmm, good come back. I haven't noticed anyone bitching about you, I have noticed them disagree with your point, however. Presumably you see that as the same thing? I'm not sure, why the only guess I can make is that you can't hold more than one concept in your tiny mind at one time. That's having a go at you, see the difference?

[flarewearer]

[s]kas48 wrote on 17:08, 8th Mar 2005:
i would make the effort if i wasn't talking mostly to a load of wan***s who spend their whole lives on the Sinner Chatroom bitching about me. it is not worth the bother justifying myself to you and your lousy virtual friends.


1/ say Wanker, swearing is fun
2/ virtual in what way? we all meet up and go drinking together etc., the chatroom is just a convenient way to keep in touch.
3/ if you want to come into the chatroom and try desperately to get laid then is it any wonder people take you at face value?

[hr]
[s]Have you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow?
You need butter, milk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw.[/s]

[exnihilo]

Oh, chatroom? Bugger, didn't notice that. I really must learn to read more carefully. Ignore my last post, mostly.

[LonelyPilgrim]

4/ We hardly spend all of our time saying derogatory things about you, you aren't that special

5/ For the record, the only derogatory things *I* have said about you have been on this thread, to the best of my knowledge, and in direct relation to the topic at hand.

6/ My primary problem with you is that like most avid nationalists, you use history as a tool, modifying as needed to better fit your ideology.

7/ Of course, you also seem to accord little or no respect to opposing viewpoints.

8/ As a good example, I respect your right to want to divorce Scotland and things Scottish from English influence, or what you regard as English oppression. I respect that you believe strongly in this cause, and I admire your spirit and obvious passion.

9/ What I do not respect, is that to you, it would seem that anyone who disagrees with you can not possibly be a 'true' Scot.

10/ I fail to see how this viewpoint qualifies me as a wanker.

11/ Discussions like this always make me wish we could all meet up in some dark pub, conspiratorially, so the heated statements could be complimented by dramatic gestures and people storming out of the room slamming doors et al. It would be a lot more fun, I think.

[hr]I sing of arms, and the man...

[Smith]

12/We only abuse current users of the sinner chatroom.
13/Dunno, but there must be more stuff that I hate about you that I haven't put into words yet



[hr]
I tried thinking of an innovative witty remark, but could only come up with this...

[David Bean]

[s]flarewearer wrote on 15:06, 8th Mar 2005:
Again, you astound me with your stupidity Kas48;

a/ I can vouch that David is Scottish, and Im pretty sure he doesnt want to be classed under your nationality classification system of "anyone that doesnt think like me obviously isn't Scotiish."

Thankyou for saying so; I hadn't checked this thread to be able to defend myself. National identity is a hugely personal issue; one person might attach more importance to parentage, whereas a second might think it has to do with the environment in which one was brought up. I belong to the latter category, but there's room for more than one worldview, surely?

b/ What is this mysterious system you use to magically deduce someone's nationality based on a few sentences the write on a message board? I wish i could stereotype people as easy as you can.

Oh, I think she was careful to assassinate quite everything about me based on those few sentences, not just my nationality! Which is a shame. However, the question has been resolved: I am officially not a yah. And that's the bottom line - because Jo Kerr said so!

c/ What the fuck has following a religion got to do with your nationality?

That too is a good question. Yes, I do happen to be not unhealthily religious (and in being thus I may indeed be stupid and gullible, but I'm not likely to be bullied and insulted into changing my mind), but the substance of my signature quotation doesn't have to be taken in a religious context even though its source is the Bible. I think its intention is quite clear.

d/ Please go and learn some basic Scottish and British history and politics, you might talk less complete and utter shite for it.

In the interests of diplomacy, I'll leave that one where it is!

On the subject of the Confederate flag, by the way, I'd always been under the impression that the original one was almost identical to the Union flag, just with fewer bars and stars, but it was changed to the cross because the former was too difficult to distinguish in battle. Certainly all of the later artists' impressions I've seen have the cross depicted in scenes of battle, and the Confederate version of the song "Battle Cry of Freedom" states 'Down with the eagle, up with the cross'. On what basis, then, was it not the true Confederate flag?

[hr]
"For what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul?- Matthew 16:26