-TSS-

The media really whipped up hysteria and lynch-mentality in a case which was already sensitive enough. Not very responsible, one must say. They seem to enjoy provoking confrontation.

Of course there are. I was just pointing out that the pro-independence people could point out to a fact that the reason why the Scottish independence was terminated 300 years ago those reasons have long ago become obsolete. Today, there are various reasons why Scotland will remain in the UK and the independence-referendum will most likely result in a defeat for the independence-movement.

The act of union of 1707 which was signed between England and Scotland to form the United Kingdom was a move against the growing influence of the French. The English wanted to make sure that the Scots don't scheme behind the scenes in favour of the French. It can be said with a reasonable degree that the reasons for the signing of the act of union over 300 years ago have become outdated so the act should be dissolved and English and Scottish independence should be restored.

The Scottish National Party is overwhelmigly the most popualr party in Scotland but the people of Scotland are very unlikely to support the main-agenda of the party- the independence. If and when the referendum will end ina defeat for the independence it will bury the issue for decades to come and really destroy the reason for existence for the SNP:

By that same logic you could have told the Irish 100 years ago that they really don't need a country of their own as they have sufficient home-rule.

If Scotland became independent it would create a lot of confusion as to who would be citizens of Scotland. A lot of English- and Welsh-born people living in Scotland would all of a sudden become foreigners even though they never thought of themselves as such.

I'm all for it but at the same time it should be noted that it is extremely unlikely to happen. Such a shame. If there is an independent Ireland there is no reason why there shouldn't be an independent Scotland.

I know this is a Canadian forum but I still must tell you about an Aussie friend of mine years ago. Namely, there was the republic-referendum in Australia in 1999 and the republic lost the referendum. Not really because people would have preferred the monarchy but because the pro-monarchy government worded the referendum in a way that was unacceptable to the voters. However, my Aussie friend was talking to some of his Japanese friends about the upcoming referendum and his friends said that perhaps it is time for Australia to finally become independent. That was in 1999 and those people did not know that Australia has been independent since 1901. It's just an arrangement that the foreign head of state is the head of state of Australia as well. That moment made up my friend's mind as he was undecided until then. He voted for the republic but to his disappointment the republic lost.

Exactly, how big an issue is this in Canada? I could imagine that for an immigrant coming from a third world country if the only obstacle to becoming a citizen of a wealthy western country is to swear an allegiance to a foreign head of state, I just can't believe there would be a long queue of people refusing to swear such an oath.

Perhaps in fledgling democracies they should have at first very short terms for presidents and parliaments so that if their new leaders turn out to be incompetent the people have sooner an opportunity to kick them out and don't have to start yet another revolution.

Hudson: You should register yourself on this site. http://smeggys.co.uk/ The forum-host speaks exactly like you do. You would make the best of friends.

It's the only hope for the survival of the human race that China colonises Africa and enforces such strict rules that the birth-rate of Africa plummets. Cruel as it may sound but that is really the only way to go. Otherwise the world will get suffocated with overpopulation.

As much as I hate to admit it I must still say that the islamists are right on this issue. It's a totally another matter whether the coup was necessary to restore order. Perhaps, perhaps not. However, to justify the coup by vaguely stating the will of the people is not the right answer. Thousands of people out 85m people marching and rioting in the streets interpreted as being the will of the people to overthrow the government?

This latest turn of events is probably a sigh of relief for Israel. 30 years ago Anwar Sadat was murdered by the islamic brotherhood for signing a peace-treaty with Israel. Probably Israel feels safer that its next door neighbour is controlled by the army than belligerent civilians. Oh, the irony!

The ousting of Morsi could have a major impact on the Syrian civil-war as well as Morsi and his party supported the rebels and was contemplating intervening. That probably was the main reason why the Egyptian army threw him out. They don't want to be involved in Syria.

The president representing Muslim brotherhood has been ousted but it doesn't mean that the new regime is anti-Islam as it has been made to believe. In a country with 85% of the population being Muslims it is very likely that the army is also pro-Islam.

Brazil would be just an ideal tourist-paradise but as long as it has the repuatation of being an extremely violent and dangerous society it is futile to hope for any boom in the tourist-trade.

Sorry, wrong thread.

The biggest riot expected tonight as it is the final of the Conferedations cup.

Israel must either grant Palestine independence or set up an apartheid-system as it is inevitable that within the current borders of Israel the Jews will be outnumbered by arabs. If returning to the pre-1967 borders that might save some time.

Someone, let's say Obama or at least Kerry, should answer that question.

I'm surprised that this news is not more commented on this site as it must be a big news in Canada. After all, if a highly developed country like Canada is helpless in confronting the floods you can only imagine the blight of people in Bangladesh which is not as highly developed and where floods are a more frequent thing.

Soon they are going to have a massive shortage of women resulting in a lot of angry young men who can't find wives. So, women need to be imported, which kind of defeats the purpose.

India will soon overtake China as world's most populous country but even India is not a long-term worry as their population is projected to start falling by the middle of the century. The real problem is Africa the population of which is expected to rise from the current 1bn to 3bn by the year 2050. Of course, predictions are just predictions and one war on a grand scale can render predictions useless. http://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/Most-Populous-Countries-In-2100.htm

7bn people on this planet right now and the figure is rapidly rising. Only 20 years ago the figure was 5bn. At this rate we are heading for a doom. Ok, I admit that if a population of 300,000 were a standard size of a country, there would also be less trade and opportunities of wealth arising from it.