Brexit?

[Justin Z]

Always happy to help, guys.

 

[AlphonseCapone]

Nothing, no matter what Sturgeon or the other right-on ******s in the SNP say. It was a British vote after Scotland remained within. It's as simple as that.

 

I voted yes in 2014 and leave as the argument was the same. I'm getting heavily pissed off at how the SNP have treated both decisions, their holier than thou attitude and posturing when these matters have been put to bed.

Tbf, your opinions are the minority view in Scotland on both issues.

[Adam Murray]

Wallonia. The mouse that roared.  

 

 

Here's the article here regarding Wallonia, which highlights the difficulty in anything getting done within the EU, and how the path of Brexit won't be a smooth one, but at the same time, how any application from a future independent Scotland would't be plain sailing.

 

Seven years these negotiations with Canada have been going on.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/eu-is-impossible-to-do-deals-with-canada-says-sparking-fears-abo/

[aussieh]

Nothing, no matter what Sturgeon or the other right-on ******s in the SNP say. It was a British vote after Scotland remained within. It's as simple as that.

 

I voted yes in 2014 and leave as the argument was the same. I'm getting heavily pissed off at how the SNP have treated both decisions, their holier than thou attitude and posturing when these matters have been put to bed.

Bed, I'm wide awake,thanks. You?

 

As for tripper, what a delusional little Stockholmer. Come indy day his lot will have it rammed right up them.

[JamboX2]

It was a reference to an Edinburgh band, they're not as crap as David Icke though, quite the opposite in fact.

 

Sorry for the mix up.

 

Anyway, yes I do think that, which is exactly my point. If Scotland votes yes then we won't have time to hang about waiting on these new parties to be formed. As seen with Brexit, as soon as the results are in the effects begin.

 

It's not my view, it's a fact that the parties I mentioned in my post are run from Westminster and as such should and would have nothing to do with an independent Scotland.

Only on Westminster matters. All matters relating to Scotland they run everything from policy forming to candidate selection to decision naking on approach, style and tone. They don't need to be formed. They exist and would do post independence.

 

Nothing wrong with my logic, you however have managed to go from party to individual then claim that my logic would exclude an elected UK politician from a post in UK government committee.

I disagree but get your point.

[JamboX2]

I think I have used a lot of evidence from various sources to refute your unsubstantiated claims. You were a Yes voter were you not?

Indeed I did. However, I never bought the economic argument. I acceptedthe potential argument but not the economic case. Certainly not the spending promises and was quite vocal in saying the White Paper wasn't worth the paper it was written on.

 

When people make daft or mistaken points in their posts I sometimes challenge them and ask for evidence to support their views. Often they disappear, sometimes they launch into insults and others try to change the argument. I think evidence is essential in debate, your opinions should be evidence based and not anecdotal like so many NO voters on here. Don't make me go back through the threads to prove it though.

I'd argue that equally applies to Yes voters on here. One side isn't the purveyor or holder of truth here. I'd also say that whilst evidence based opiniond are of course important, there are also arguments of morality and identity which are not always evidence based here.

 

Equally, I've read many on here, more knowledgeable than me on such things, challengenyou with evidence based arguments on GERS etc and they were as convincing as your own.

 

There's also the context issue of where you get your evidence from. Obviously, the Adam Smith Institute will provide a very different argument than the IPPR for example.

[Space Mackerel]

Here's the article here regarding Wallonia, which highlights the difficulty in anything getting done within the EU, and how the path of Brexit won't be a smooth one, but at the same time, how any application from a future independent Scotland would't be plain sailing.

 

Seven years these negotiations with Canada have been going on.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/eu-is-impossible-to-do-deals-with-canada-says-sparking-fears-abo/

I'd put my house on it that an independent Scotland would be back in the EU before any trade deal with England was done.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mister T]

 

 

His opinion is worth f all.

[Mister T]

I'd put my house on it that an independent Scotland would be back in the EU before any trade deal with England was done.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

A caravan a seton sands isn't much of a stake.

[coconut doug]

Indeed I did. However, I never bought the economic argument. I acceptedthe potential argument but not the economic case. Certainly not the spending promises and was quite vocal in saying the White Paper wasn't worth the paper it was written on.

 

 

I'd argue that equally applies to Yes voters on here. One side isn't the purveyor or holder of truth here. I'd also say that whilst evidence based opiniond are of course important, there are also arguments of morality and identity which are not always evidence based here.

 

Equally, I've read many on here, more knowledgeable than me on such things, challengenyou with evidence based arguments on GERS etc and they were as convincing as your own.

 

There's also the context issue of where you get your evidence from. Obviously, the Adam Smith Institute will provide a very different argument than the IPPR for example.

Not disputing any of that. If you were to argue against everything you disagreed with on here you would never get out the house. IMO most fair minded people would accept that the economic argument is the weakest part of the Indy case however that does not defeat the argument for Indy. Gers are not conclusive and vary considerably from year to year. They are estimates of something happening now that would not happen in an independent country. they are far from conclusive and so open to challenge. I'm not going to do that though because even if they are broadly correct IMo it makes the case for Indy stronger. I don't want to be subsidised by other areas of the UK who are often poorer than we are. That is unsustainable, we must learn to stand on our own and the sooner we attempt it the better.

 

Sure the AS institute and IPPR will give us a different perspective but that's often just what it is, an opinion same as yours or mine. What is harder to refute are actual facts e.g. the level of debt in the UK continues to rise significantly (checkable through govt figures) but many Tories and their supporters believe the economy is being run well and that the debt is being reduced. They believe this because somebody else (The press) does their thinking for them. They also believe that Labour overspending wrecked the economy in the first place. Your source has to be empirically checkable and verifiable it should not be a blog, pressure group or think tanks observations of events. The best we have are statistics like those that tell us waiting times have dropped in A+E and that the number of reported crimes has dropped. We compile and measure things badly which can create dispute (Gers the classic example) but Indy is about more than money for me. We are all victims of our own prejudices but some will not accept the best sources providing the clearest of facts. You know who you are.

[Adam Murray]

I'd put my house on it that an independent Scotland would be back in the EU before any trade deal with England was done.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'd put a wager on Elvis being found on the moon riding a unicorn, before any trade deal between the EU and England is done.

[Space Mackerel]

 

His opinion is worth f all.

 

Aye, ok then. Bought your new jeely pan yet?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jake]

Business debt default has fallen since brexit.

Theres other good signs in the economy.

Construction is on the up.

Both good indicators for the long term if you're into capitalism.

 

Then there is the small matter of CETA.

Niblick posted on here a few days ago.

 

That vote from the people of Wallonia was right up there.

Boom !!!!

 

Apologies to niblick for not joinin in at the time.

 

Another juicy spanner in the works.

 

Anyway it just baffles me why the EU is the darling of the left.

[JamboX2]

Business debt default has fallen since brexit.

Theres other good signs in the economy.

Construction is on the up.

Both good indicators for the long term if you're into capitalism.

 

Then there is the small matter of CETA.

Niblick posted on here a few days ago.

 

That vote from the people of Wallonia was right up there.

Boom !!!!

 

Apologies to niblick for not joinin in at the time.

 

Another juicy spanner in the works.

 

Anyway it just baffles me why the EU is the darling of the left.

The left like the protection of workers rights.

The right like the free market of near 500million consumers.

The centre likes both.

 

And Brexit hasn't happened yet. It's hard to know the full impact until Article 50 is implemented.

 

But inflation is up. The ? is down and imports of food, fuel etc will cost more as a result the cost of living is rising. A cheap ? might work for some because the UK is becoming a bargain economy but it's not good for people.

[zoltan socrates]

Business debt default has fallen since brexit.

 

Anyway it just baffles me why the EU is the darling of the left.

Both camps want to homogenise us on this continent, made for each other

[jake]

Those pesky ignorant racist belgians .

How dare they vote against the wonderful EU.

[Francis Albert]

The left like the protection of workers rights.

The right like the free market of near 500million consumers.

The centre likes both.

 

And Brexit hasn't happened yet. It's hard to know the full impact until Article 50 is implemented.

 

But inflation is up. The ? is down and imports of food, fuel etc will cost more as a result the cost of living is rising. A cheap ? might work for some because the UK is becoming a bargain economy but it's not good for people.

I wonder what the 40% or more of a whole generation or more of young people in Southern Europe who face long term unemployment feel about "workers rights".

 

I am always puzzled by the fact that all these Europhiles never have a word to say about them. No demonstrations in support of the victims of German-imposed austerity.

 

Just about their own future being supposedly ruined by Brexit.

[niblick1874]

Those pesky ignorant racist belgians .

How dare they vote against the wonderful EU.

 

A well, we've tried, that's all that can be asked of us.

They can all carry on missing the obvious.

I got drunk toasting them.

The havoc they have wreaked is of the scale, not to mention the power of those they took down.

We may never see the likes of this again.

[Ibrahim Tall]

Those pesky ignorant racist belgians .

How dare they vote against the wonderful EU.

Wait, so one second the EU is all powerful new German empire and imposing it's will over all the individual countries and an independent Scotland would be irrelevant and giving up its sovereignty if it joined the EU, the next the EU is being ridiculed because even a region smaller than Scotland is being allowed to express its opinion and effect real change?

[Adam Murray]

Nigel Farage continues to ruffle the feathers of the EU parliament.

 

[Space Mackerel]

I wonder what the 40% or more of a whole generation or more of young people in Southern Europe who face long term unemployment feel about "workers rights".

 

I am always puzzled by the fact that all these Europhiles never have a word to say about them. No demonstrations in support of the victims of German-imposed austerity.

 

Just about their own future being supposedly ruined by Brexit.

 

The Greek government could start by collecting their dues from the people and business instead of making tax avoidance their national sport.  

[Cade]

Wait, so one second the EU is all powerful new German empire and imposing it's will over all the individual countries and an independent Scotland would be irrelevant and giving up its sovereignty if it joined the EU, the next the EU is being ridiculed because even a region smaller than Scotland is being allowed to express its opinion and effect real change?

 

The "undemocratic" EU working like a proper democracy with one member state vetoing a bill.

 

(Bear in mind that Scotland, Wale and NI don't have vetoes in the UK)

[jake]

 

The "undemocratic" EU working like a proper democracy with one member state vetoing a bill.

 

(Bear in mind that Scotland, Wale and NI don't have vetoes in the UK)

 

Belgium didnt want to veto but couldnt ratify because they have checks and balances.

Thankfully.

[jake]

Nigel Farage continues to ruffle the feathers of the EU parliament.

 

 

Like him or not he hits the nail .

[Adam Murray]

 

The "undemocratic" EU working like a proper democracy with one member state vetoing a bill.

 

(Bear in mind that Scotland, Wale and NI don't have vetoes in the UK)

 

 

Wallonia are not a member state of the EU, but as jake say's, under the Belgian political system, major international deals need to be signed off by regional parliaments.

[Ibrahim Tall]

Belgium didnt want to veto but couldnt ratify because they have checks and balances.

Thankfully.

You're missing the point, apparently the EU is some undemocratic beast bullying and overruling its individual member states. Despite this a small region of Belgium has managed to veto both the whole of Belgium and in turn the EU itself.

 

You also can't praise Belgium for 'thankfully having checks and balances' when the exact same has just been proven of the EU.

[Adam Murray]

You're missing the point, apparently the EU is some undemocratic beast bullying and overruling its individual member states. Despite this a small region of Belgium has managed to veto both the whole of Belgium and in turn the EU itself.

 

You also can't praise Belgium for 'thankfully having checks and balances' when the exact same has just been proven of the EU.

 

 

We've probably not heard the last of this, the trade deal with Canada.

I can't imagine Donald Tusk nor Jean-Claude Juncker will be very happy about it.

 

Is it perhaps a case of some countries/regions being braver and speaking out due to the UK's referendum result, probably just a coincidence, I don't know, I suppose time will tell.

[Boris]

Wallonia are not a member state of the EU, but as jake say's, under the Belgian political system, major international deals need to be signed off by regional parliaments.

 

Now, imagine if we had that!

[Francis Albert]

 

The "undemocratic" EU working like a proper democracy with one member state vetoing a bill.

 

(Bear in mind that Scotland, Wale and NI don't have vetoes in the UK)

It is hardly evidence of democracy that a tiny region with 1% of the EU's population can exercise a veto. It is more an example of the dysfunctionality of the EU.

 

But I would be surprised if Wallonia is not somehow persuaded to fall in line.

[Francis Albert]

The Greek government could start by collecting their dues from the people and business instead of making tax avoidance their national sport.  

A bit rich coming from the UK. Still good to see national stereotyping lives on in the happy big EU family.

[Boris]

It is hardly evidence of democracy that a tiny region with 1% of the EU's population can exercise a veto. It is more an example of the dysfunctionality of the EU.

 

But I would be surprised if Wallonia is not somehow persuaded to fall in line.

 

It's rather that it is evidence of the consociational democracy that is Belgium.

 

It isn't about Wallonia holding the EU to ransom, or indeed of a disfunctional EU.

 

Rather it highlights how one member state operates and how it ratifies decision making at an international level.

 

It also highlights how one member of the EU can actually say "Non", because all we have ever been fed about the EU is that it is a "diktat from Brussels".  Or that we have to do what Brussels says.  This is an example of democracy in action!

 

Perhaps if we had governments that were willing to engage properly with Europe we would have the ability to either shape the argument to how what we would percieve as the best interests of the EU, but also able to set the agenda in the first place.

[Gorgiewave]

It's rather that it is evidence of the consociational democracy that is Belgium.

 

It isn't about Wallonia holding the EU to ransom, or indeed of a disfunctional EU.

 

Rather it highlights how one member state operates and how it ratifies decision making at an international level.

 

It also highlights how one member of the EU can actually say "Non", because all we have ever been fed about the EU is that it is a "diktat from Brussels".  Or that we have to do what Brussels says.  This is an example of democracy in action!

 

Perhaps if we had governments that were willing to engage properly with Europe we would have the ability to either shape the argument to how what we would percieve as the best interests of the EU, but also able to set the agenda in the first place.

 

So, what if it is clearly in iScotland's interest to have a deal with Canada but it's humped by Wallonia? Neither independence nor good for Scotland.

 

You're by miles the most disappointing person on this thread and in this area on kickback. Space Mackerel, aussieh and the rest don't have a brain and don't know better, but you should.

[Boris]

So, what if it is clearly in iScotland's interest to have a deal with Canada but it's humped by Wallonia? Neither independence nor good for Scotland.

 

You're by miles the most disappointing person on this thread and in this area on kickback. Space Mackerel, aussieh and the rest don't have a brain and don't know better, but you should.

 

Point one, the deal is "humped" by Belgium, not Wallonia as Wallonia have no EU veto.

 

Secondly, that's life!  Joining an association of countries and having an EQUAL vote on things is part of the deal and Scotland would go into that with its eyes open.

 

Currently we have no ability like Wallonia within the UK framework and we certainly do not have an equal vote on things.

 

I'm the most disappointing person?  Because I differ in opinion to you?  How (un)remarkably patronising. 

[Gorgiewave]

Point one, the deal is "humped" by Belgium, not Wallonia as Wallonia have no EU veto.

 

Secondly, that's life!  Joining an association of countries and having an EQUAL vote on things is part of the deal and Scotland would go into that with its eyes open.

 

Currently we have no ability like Wallonia within the UK framework and we certainly do not have an equal vote on things.

 

I'm the most disappointing person?  Because I differ in opinion to you?  How (un)remarkably patronising. 

 

No, not because you differ in opinion; because it's plain as day that being in the EU curtails the ability of a state to pursue its interests, since it is subject to the veto of countries that may be quite far away, have quite little connection with Scotland and trade almost nothing with Scotland. Yet, the First Minister argues that (a) Scotland's interests can only be protected in the EU; ( Scotland's interests can only be protected by independence.

 

It is a glaring, obvious contradiction and I don't know why you don't see that or say it.

 

Westminster does something that Nicola Sturgeon doesn't like: Tyranny!

Wallonia kyboshes a deal that includes Scotland: democracy in action.

[Francis Albert]

Point one, the deal is "humped" by Belgium, not Wallonia as Wallonia have no EU veto.

 

Secondly, that's life!  Joining an association of countries and having an EQUAL vote on things is part of the deal and Scotland would go into that with its eyes open.

 

Currently we have no ability like Wallonia within the UK framework and we certainly do not have an equal vote on things.

 

I'm the most disappointing person?  Because I differ in opinion to you?  How (un)remarkably patronising. 

Are you seriously suggesting Scotland should have a veto on non-devolved issues? And that you think that would be more democratic?

 

It would certainly advance the somewhat beleaguered cause of Scottish independence,. The UK would kick us out before Scotland got round to voting for it.

[Gorgiewave]

Are you seriously suggesting Scotland should have a veto on non-devolved issues? And that you think that would be more democratic?

 

It would certainly advance the somewhat beleaguered cause of Scottish independence,. The UK would kick us out before Scotland got round to voting for it.

 

If iScotland doesn't have a veto at the UN Security Council, then they'll declare independence from themselves.

[Boris]

No, not because you differ in opinion; because it's plain as day that being in the EU curtails the ability of a state to pursue its interests, since it is subject to the veto of countries that may be quite far away, have quite little connection with Scotland and trade almost nothing with Scotland. Yet, the First Minister argues that (a) Scotland's interests can only be protected in the EU; ( Scotland's interests can only be protected by independence.

 

It is a glaring, obvious contradiction and I don't know why you don't see that or say it.

 

Westminster does something that Nicola Sturgeon doesn't like: Tyranny!

Wallonia kyboshes a deal that includes Scotland: democracy in action.

 

You are missing the point that it is the will of the independent nation to become part of that union!  If the State sees it as being in it and its populations interest to be part of the EU then where is the issue?

 

Compared to what Scotland has now, apparently one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world, plucky little Wallonia, via Belgium, seems to wield far more than we can shake a stick at!

 

So exiting from a single market of 500 million is a good thing?  Ok then, but I disagree.

 

What you appear to be doing is drawing a similairty between Scotland and the UK union, and how Scotland would be in the EU, yet you would appear to be comparing apples and oranges, imo.

 

So no, I don't see it as a contradiction.

[Gorgiewave]

You are missing the point that it is the will of the independent nation to become part of that union!  If the State sees it as being in it and its populations interest to be part of the EU then where is the issue?

 

Compared to what Scotland has now, apparently one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world, plucky little Wallonia, via Belgium, seems to wield far more than we can shake a stick at!

 

So exiting from a single market of 500 million is a good thing?  Ok then, but I disagree.

 

What you appear to be doing is drawing a similairty between Scotland and the UK union, and how Scotland would be in the EU, yet you would appear to be comparing apples and oranges, imo.

 

So no, I don't see it as a contradiction.

 

Diddums.

 

Wee Nip now wants a "united Scotland" against a hard Brexit. That is, she wants to dismiss the 38% of Scotland that voted Leave. Doesn't care.

 

Scotland had the chance to leave the UK in 2014 and declined. That's what kills Nip. She'll always be a Brit, though, so it doesn't matter.

[Boris]

Are you seriously suggesting Scotland should have a veto on non-devolved issues? And that you think that would be more democratic?

 

It would certainly advance the somewhat beleaguered cause of Scottish independence,. The UK would kick us out before Scotland got round to voting for it.

 

If the UK was structure along the lines of a consociational democracy such as Belgium then yes it would.  If, as we are told, we are an "equal partner" in this union then it stands to reason that the four constituent parts have an equal say so as not to suffer the "tyranny of the majority", so to speak.

 

Or perhaps we should simply rename the United Kingdom, England?  Because that is how it essentially would work.

 

If the UK is to survive, there needs to be massive constitutional change.  Devolution is a hotch-potch, the English have been omitted which is hardly fair, and so it is not surprising that failure lurks.  Federalism may just be the answer, but also electoral reform and reform of the political system.  All imho, of course.

[Adam Murray]

Now, imagine if we had that!

 

 

A crystal ball was not a prerequisite of any of the devolved Governments in the UK when they were formed.

[Space Mackerel]

A bit rich coming from the UK. Still good to see national stereotyping lives on in the happy big EU family.

I pay all my taxes in this country as do the vast majority of normal working people.

I take it you referring to these companies and businessmen/women who have close and personal ties to the current incumbents in No 10?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jake]

So, what if it is clearly in iScotland's interest to have a deal with Canada but it's humped by Wallonia? Neither independence nor good for Scotland.

 

You're by miles the most disappointing person on this thread and in this area on kickback. Space Mackerel, aussieh and the rest don't have a brain and don't know better, but you should.

 

Just out of interest am i one of the rest without a brain ?

[Francis Albert]

If the UK was structure along the lines of a consociational democracy such as Belgium then yes it would.  If, as we are told, we are an "equal partner" in this union then it stands to reason that the four constituent parts have an equal say so as not to suffer the "tyranny of the majority", so to speak.

 

Or perhaps we should simply rename the United Kingdom, England?  Because that is how it essentially would work.

 

If the UK is to survive, there needs to be massive constitutional change.  Devolution is a hotch-potch, the English have been omitted which is hardly fair, and so it is not surprising that failure lurks.  Federalism may just be the answer, but also electoral reform and reform of the political system.  All imho, of course.

"Consociational"?

 

And instead of the "tyranny of the majority" in the UK we should have "tyranny of a minority" who can simply veto the wishes of the majority. And how could we be "equal partners" if one Scottsh vote is equivalent to 10 English votes.

 

Sorry to break it to you. The Scottish people voted to remain in the UK, And the UK people voted to leave the EU. The losers in both casers seem to find it hard to accept it.

 

And the smug assumption that the EU vote would lead to an upsurge in the support for Scottish independence? There is not a shred of evidence that I have seen.

[Francis Albert]

I pay all my taxes in this country as do the vast majority of normal working people.

I take it you referring to these companies and businessmen/women who have close and personal ties to the current incumbents in No 10?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think tax avoidance in the UK extends far beyond the people you refer to.

 

IF and I think it is a big IF the "vast majority of normal working people" of  Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy still are so different from the good honest UK and German laddies, then it is another reason why creating a single market and single currency is a nonsense.

[Cade]

"Consociational"?

 

And instead of the "tyranny of the majority" in the UK we should have "tyranny of a minority" who can simply veto the wishes of the majority. And how could we be "equal partners" if one Scottsh vote is equivalent to 10 English votes.

 

Sorry to break it to you. The Scottish people voted to remain in the UK, And the UK people voted to leave the EU. The losers in both casers seem to find it hard to accept it.

 

And the smug assumption that the EU vote would lead to an upsurge in the support for Scottish independence? There is not a shred of evidence that I have seen.

So whoever is biggest nation should get the final say?

 

I welcome our new Chinese overlords

[jake]

So whoever is biggest nation should get the final say?

 

I welcome our new Chinese overlords

 

Thats what actually happens in the EU does it not.

[Francis Albert]

So whoever is biggest nation should get the final say?

 

I welcome our new Chinese overlords

No, I am not suggesting an economic or political union with China.

 

But within a United Kingdom, the nation with the largest numbers of voters will on matters which are not devolved have the largest say. It's called democracy.

 

I think the Scots understood that when they rejected independence.

[Space Mackerel]

I think tax avoidance in the UK extends far beyond the people you refer to.

 

IF and I think it is a big IF the "vast majority of normal working people" of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy still are so different from the good honest UK and German laddies, then it is another reason why creating a single market and single currency is a nonsense.

Which one of the 67 reasons were you? [emoji2]

 

http://rainbowsandlollipops.net/why-did-the-uk-vote-to-leave-the-eu/

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jake]

You're missing the point, apparently the EU is some undemocratic beast bullying and overruling its individual member states. Despite this a small region of Belgium has managed to veto both the whole of Belgium and in turn the EU itself.

 

You also can't praise Belgium for 'thankfully having checks and balances' when the exact same has just been proven of the EU.

 

The EU is finished and any nail in its coffin i am thankful for.

 

So i think you will find i can.

[Space Mackerel]

So, what if it is clearly in iScotland's interest to have a deal with Canada but it's humped by Wallonia? Neither independence nor good for Scotland.

 

You're by miles the most disappointing person on this thread and in this area on kickback. Space Mackerel, aussieh and the rest don't have a brain and don't know better, but you should.

Any chance of telling us when the NHS gets the extra ?350 million a week please?

 

Maybe you could grab a quote of Mrs May?

 

Take your time.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk