Hey, let's change the Union Jack


Locutus
#1
because Scotland, or something. Could be his kid's school project too, who knows. Anyway:

Scot-free! Union Jack gets a Yes vote makeover: Secret Government papers reveal how flag will look if Scotland votes for independence


  • Symbol has represented Britain for two centuries and is respected globally
  • Plans would see the cross of St Andrew ditched from the design
  • Would be the first change since 1801, when Ireland's red saltire was added
  • Details revealed by a Downing Street adviser as he stepped out of his car




more

How Union Jack flag will look if Scotland votes for independence | Mail Online
 
Blackleaf
#2
It's an April Fools.
 
Locutus
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

It's an April Fools.


PUBLISHED: 23:00 GMT, 31 March 2014

Stupid limeys.

They do know when the 1st begins don't they?
 
Blackleaf
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by LocutusView Post

PUBLISHED: 23:00 GMT, 31 March 2014

Stupid limeys.

They do know when the 1st begins don't they?

April Fools' Day pranksters have field day with Scottish independence vote | Mail Online

It worked. You were fooled big time.
 
Locutus
#5
I know you are but what am I.
 
shadowshiv
Free Thinker
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

April Fools' Day pranksters have field day with Scottish independence vote | Mail Online

It worked. You were fooled big time.

And if I posted an April Fool's joke on April 2nd I would get a lot of people too. April Fool's is on April 1st, NOT March 31st.
 
Blackleaf
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshivView Post

And if I posted an April Fool's joke on April 2nd I would get a lot of people too. April Fool's is on April 1st, NOT March 31st.

The article was from 1st April.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#8
I think that it's a great idea regardless of April Fools or not.

The existing Brit flag is old and tired... Looks pretty antiquated to boot.

Time for a change, I say
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

The article was from 1st April.

It was published on March 31. It was updated on April 1st.

Quote:

Published: 23:00 GMT, 31 March 2014 | Updated: 08:30 GMT, 1 April 2014



 
Blackleaf
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

It was published on March 31. It was updated on April 1st.


It appeared in the 1st April edition of the Daily Mail.
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

It appeared in the 1st April edition of the Daily Mail.

That means nothing. Once something's been published they can reprint it in any day's edition they feel like.

It was published on March 31st.
 
Locutus
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

It appeared in the 1st April edition of the Daily Mail.

Yeah, I don't care when it 'appeared' in hard copy anywhere...I'm talking about the idiot e-version of this story from the day before. They screwed up by posting it early. That's all.
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by LocutusView Post

Yeah, I don't care when it 'appeared' in hard copy anywhere...I'm talking about the idiot e-version of this story from the day before. They screwed up by posting it early. That's all.


23:00 hours GMT. They couldn't have waited one more hour?

Perhaps they have as much difficulty telling time as some do in reading a date?
 
Blackleaf
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

That means nothing. Once something's been published they can reprint it in any day's edition they feel like.

It was published on March 31st.

And it appeared in the April 1st edition of the Daily Mail as an April Fool.

This was also an April Fool, which appeared in The Guardian:

Scotland to switch to driving on the right if independence given green light | From the Guardian | The Guardian (external - login to view)

It's also the last post in this thread: forums.canadiancontent.net/in...s-yours-3.html (external - login to view)

 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

And it appeared in the April 1st edition of the Daily Mail as an April Fool.

So? It can appear in the April 2nd edition or the April 3rd edition, that doesn't change the fact that it was published and made available online on the day before April 1st.
 
Blackleaf
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

So? It can appear in the April 2nd edition or the April 3rd edition, that doesn't change the fact that it was published and made available online on the day before April 1st.

It appeared in 1st April Daily Mail because it was an April Fool.

Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

23:00 hours GMT. They couldn't have waited one more hour?

They could have done. But, then, not everyone is as pedantic as you are.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
+2
#17  Top Rated Post
Dunno.... It's April 9 and we're still braying about an April Fool.... Who's pedantic?
 
Nuggler
#18
Then we have silly old bastards like me who wish the Jack was still the flag of Canada.

go figure.
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Dunno.... It's April 9 and we're still braying about an April Fool.... Who's pedantic?

Who's "we"? Don't you mean "him"? Lol.

See this is what he does when he's backed himself into a ridiculous corner, just waits a few days until everything dies down then posts a "retort". Suppose it's his sad way of getting the last word in or something. Whatever. Let the baby have his bottle then.
 
Nuggler
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

Who's "we"? Don't you mean "him"? Lol.

See this is what he does when he's backed himself into a ridiculous corner, just waits a few days until everything dies down then posts a "retort". Suppose it's his sad way of getting the last word in or something. Whatever. Let the baby have his bottle then.


Imagine holding it in for a week. Guy's going to have a stroke. Then again, strokes affect the brain, so maybe not.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

Who's "we"? Don't you mean "him"? Lol.

See this is what he does when he's backed himself into a ridiculous corner, just waits a few days until everything dies down then posts a "retort". Suppose it's his sad way of getting the last word in or something. Whatever. Let the baby have his bottle then.

"We" is third person psychospeak for "him".... Wouldn't want to call attention to the fresh-painted floor around his corner
 
no new posts